From owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org  Fri Mar 18 19:56:21 2016
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 12342AD581B
 for <freebsd-hackers@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Fri, 18 Mar 2016 19:56:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org)
Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (bigwig.baldwin.cx [IPv6:2001:470:1f11:75::1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E73D71BC5;
 Fri, 18 Mar 2016 19:56:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org)
Received: from ralph.baldwin.cx (c-73-231-226-104.hsd1.ca.comcast.net
 [73.231.226.104])
 by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 051B9B977;
 Fri, 18 Mar 2016 15:56:20 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To: Stanislav Sedov <stas@freebsd.org>
Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian.chadd@gmail.com>,
 Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>,
 "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Peformance issues with r278325
Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 12:39:17 -0700
Message-ID: <2326466.jJrZ2mpkPP@ralph.baldwin.cx>
User-Agent: KMail/4.14.3 (FreeBSD/10.2-STABLE; KDE/4.14.3; amd64; ; )
In-Reply-To: <A6D0C094-9402-49D6-832D-4BA9C2A7384F@FreeBSD.org>
References: <FA50A68E-7F3D-4361-8A8A-EB7F97EF3D00@FreeBSD.org>
 <8EE51E0E-41F4-4B5A-A755-B58E8E1D1776@FreeBSD.org>
 <A6D0C094-9402-49D6-832D-4BA9C2A7384F@FreeBSD.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7
 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Fri, 18 Mar 2016 15:56:20 -0400 (EDT)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
 <freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-hackers>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 19:56:21 -0000

On Friday, March 18, 2016 12:01:37 PM Stanislav Sedov wrote:
> 
> > On Mar 18, 2016, at 11:16 AM, Stanislav Sedov <stas@freebsd.org> wrote:
> > 
> > FWIW we are currently testing the delay '1' change.  Unfortunately, the test is
> > not easy to repeat (we didn't find a synthetic one yet that results in the same
> > outcome), so it does take more time that I would like.  Will follow up with the 
> > results.
> > 
> > We did try HEAD as well a while ago, and although it exhibited the same pattern.
> > However it did not utilize the x2apic unfortunately, as it does seem to be disables
> > in the BIOS (FreeBSD reports it being disables in the DMAR table).
> > 
> > Thanks for looking into it!
> > 
> 
> Replying to my own message.
> 
> The `delay 1` test was a success, we were not able to reproduce the same issues
> as we had with a 5us delay in that loop.  So perhaps we should commit the delay
> change into stable/10 instead of reverting the code altogether (I assume the original
> change was done to solve a real issue?).

Ok, I will commit this to HEAD today.  Thanks!

-- 
John Baldwin