From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Dec 18 03:24:54 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF82E106566C; Sun, 18 Dec 2011 03:24:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-vw0-f54.google.com (mail-vw0-f54.google.com [209.85.212.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 550188FC08; Sun, 18 Dec 2011 03:24:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by vbbfr13 with SMTP id fr13so5765002vbb.13 for ; Sat, 17 Dec 2011 19:24:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=x368iKnmWrkl4we0Yiv2QvjL4cvlC46YLQqOguOSAK8=; b=Yucum6xBW8R6S7XMdPOvkVpnAvyFjJcbJd7c0uN+PVSJ1S09U6wpgW68gPBZbooah9 oTappkkO8QjILClOQRnT8DLjsxzNubo+orrmyTd/5WLoYY8CVksEhSsuK4WpeyteqGHj FKgYxygGRQcXZoOglc6ZDLHbN16pTXx2Ifopg= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.52.20.165 with SMTP id o5mr9130132vde.79.1324178693461; Sat, 17 Dec 2011 19:24:53 -0800 (PST) Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.26.50 with HTTP; Sat, 17 Dec 2011 19:24:53 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <4EED10EF.1030108@FreeBSD.org> References: <4EE1EAFE.3070408@m5p.com> <4EE2AE64.9060802@m5p.com> <4EE88343.2050302@m5p.com> <4EE933C6.4020209@zedat.fu-berlin.de> <4EECD261.2080208@m5p.com> <4EED05EC.8050103@FreeBSD.org> <4EED10EF.1030108@FreeBSD.org> Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 19:24:53 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: By0AXkDFY2ucT3joWfCw6pX44lg Message-ID: From: Adrian Chadd To: Andriy Gapon Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: George Mitchell , freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Oliver Pinter Subject: Re: SCHED_ULE should not be the default X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Dec 2011 03:24:54 -0000 On 17 December 2011 14:00, Andriy Gapon wrote: > on 17/12/2011 23:20 Adrian Chadd said the following: >> This may -not- be a userland specific problem.. > That's an interesting idea. =A0From the recent discussion about USB I can= conclude > that USB threads run at higher priority than GEOM threads: PI_NET/PI_DISK= vs > PRIBIO. =A0The former is from the ithread range, the latter is from the r= egular > kernel range. =A0Maybe it would make sense to give the GEOM threads a pri= ority > from the ithread range too - given their role and importance. Ah, so I can just punt this to you? Sweet! *punt*. I haven't had time to dig into the network side of things but I do plan on doing this soon. Hopefully something really silly shows up. Adrian