Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 15 Aug 2007 13:42:18 -0400
From:      Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
To:        Artem Kuchin <matrix@itlegion.ru>
Cc:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: twa is giant locked in 7-Current or everywhere?
Message-ID:  <20070815174218.GB71910@rot26.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <000b01c7df5f$0ee4eec0$0c00a8c0@Artem>
References:  <000b01c7df5f$0ee4eec0$0c00a8c0@Artem>

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

--9amGYk9869ThD9tj
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 09:09:33PM +0400, Artem Kuchin wrote:
> Hi!
>=20
> When i installed twas driver on 6.2-STABLE it said
> [FAST]
>=20
> i presumed that it measn that twa is giant-lock free.
>=20
> Now, after installing 7-CURRENT i see
>=20
> Aug 15 17:00:02 omni3 kernel: 3ware device driver for 9000 series storage=
=20
> controllers, version: 3.70.03.007
> Aug 15 17:00:02 omni3 kernel: twa0: <3ware 9000 series Storage Controller=
>=20
> port 0x3000-0x30ff mem 0x88000000-0x89ffffff,0x8a200000-0x8a200fff irq 16=
=20
> at devic
> Aug 15 17:00:02 omni3 kernel: twa0: [GIANT-LOCKED]
> Aug 15 17:00:02 omni3 kernel: twa0: [ITHREAD]
>=20
>=20
> So, it says GIANT-LOCKED and then ITHREAD.
>=20
> Apparently, i have no real understaning what those words mean.
> COuld anyone explain the meaning of
>=20
> FAST
> ITHREAD
>=20
> Giant-locked is self explanatory and.. bad.

I think 6.x doesn't display the GIANT-LOCKED messages because users
were freaking out too much after they were added at an earlier point
in 6.x development ("Q: why is this driver suddenly giant locked?" "A:
It's always been giant locked, now this fact is displayed as a note to
developers.").

While it's true that a non-giant locked driver would be better, it's
not as bad as you might think because almost nothing else requires
giant for most workloads thesedays (see
http://wiki.freebsd.org/SMPTODO), so in those workloads performance
will not be worse because of it.  If you are really bothered by this
you can enable mutex profiling to check how much of a problem it is
for you.

Kris

--9amGYk9869ThD9tj
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.4 (FreeBSD)

iD8DBQFGwzr6Wry0BWjoQKURAv/3AJ9TKDV1HJqsGssQg5PRc4fvpDIm0QCeNTTx
NxeJgbo66J+LmKZuCvd5bvc=
=4Ahm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--9amGYk9869ThD9tj--



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070815174218.GB71910>