Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 29 Apr 2005 23:12:46 +0100 (BST)
From:      Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
To:        performance@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: Memory allocation performance/statistics patches
Message-ID:  <20050429231211.J31768@fledge.watson.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050425181101.Y74930@fledge.watson.org>
References:  <20050417134448.L85588@fledge.watson.org> <20050425114546.O74930@fledge.watson.org> <20050425181101.Y74930@fledge.watson.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, Robert Watson wrote:

> On Mon, 25 Apr 2005, Robert Watson wrote:
>
>> I now have updated versions of these patches, which correct some 
>> inconsistencies in approach (universal use of curcpu now, for example), 
>> remove some debugging code, etc.  I've received relatively little 
>> performance feedback on them, and would appreciate it if I could get some. 
>> :-) Especially as to whether these impact disk I/O related workloads, 
>> useful macrobenchmarks, etc.  The latest patch is at:
>> 
>> 
>> http://www.watson.org/~robert/freebsd/netperf/20050425-uma-mbuf-malloc-critical.diff
>
> FYI: For those set up to track perforce, you can find the contents of 
> this patch in:
>
>    //depot/user/rwatson/percpu/...
>
> In addition, that branch also contains diagnostic micro-benchmarks in 
> the kernel to measure the cost of various synchronization operations, 
> memory allocation operations, etc, which can be queried using "sysctl 
> test".

FYI:

I've now committed the UMA changes from this patch.

Robert N M Watson



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050429231211.J31768>