Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2007 03:57:44 -0700 From: Alfred Perlstein <alfred@freebsd.org> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> Cc: stable@freebsd.org, Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>, jhb@freebsd.org Subject: Re: LOCK_PROFILING in -stable Message-ID: <20071021105744.GC31826@elvis.mu.org> In-Reply-To: <471B143E.7050200@FreeBSD.org> References: <20071019232846.GQ31826@elvis.mu.org> <4719B06F.3000103@FreeBSD.org> <20071020181811.W70919@fledge.watson.org> <20071020192717.GX31826@elvis.mu.org> <471B143E.7050200@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org> [071021 01:56] wrote: > Alfred Perlstein wrote: > >* Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> [071020 10:21] wrote: > >>On Sat, 20 Oct 2007, Kris Kennaway wrote: > >> > >>>Alfred Perlstein wrote: > >>>>Hey guys, I have LOCK_PROFILING done for a product based on FreeBSD-6, > >>>>this means I can relatively easily backport LOCK_PROFILING from > >>>>FreeBSD-7 to FreeBSD-6. > >>>> > >>>>Do we want this? > >>>> > >>>>I'd like to do it if people want it. > >>>I think it should be done, performance is a lot better than the old 6.x > >>>version and it also adds another very useful performance metric (time > >>>spent waiting for the lock). The only concern is that it doesn't break > >>>ABI support when not compiled in, but I'm pretty sure you've already > >>>told me this is OK. Thanks for looking at this. > >>This is my feeling also -- I would consider ABI breakage a show stopper > >>for 6.x, but feel otherwise that the new code is much more mature and > >>capable and would be quite beneficial to people building appliances and > >>related products on 6.x. You might check with Attilio about whether there > >>are any remaining outstanding issues that need to be resolved first, and > >>make sure to send a heads up out on stable@ and put a note in UPDATING > >>that the option and details have changed. > > > >I still get confused as to the meaning of this... > > > >It only breaks ABI when it's enabled. > > > >I think that is OK, right? > > > > Yes, that is fine. Other existing debugging options also break ABI when > enabled, so it's OK. OK, I should have something over the next couple of weeks. -- - Alfred Perlstein
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20071021105744.GC31826>