Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2017 15:32:31 -0700 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> To: Mateusz Guzik <mjguzik@gmail.com> Cc: Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au>, Mateusz Guzik <mjg@freebsd.org>, "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r323393 - in head/sys: sys vm Message-ID: <20170913223231.GN1055@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CAGudoHG8yVw46cwmpswnozMf-pSjHtBXHDk8DmJ6v=CwOCvWLg@mail.gmail.com> References: <201709101900.v8AJ0c2N059845@repo.freebsd.org> <20170911111127.B870@besplex.bde.org> <CAGudoHG8yVw46cwmpswnozMf-pSjHtBXHDk8DmJ6v=CwOCvWLg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Sep 11, 2017 at 09:30:10AM +0200, Mateusz Guzik wrote: M> First, there is a bunch of counter(9) fields. I don't know the original M> reasoning. I would expect these counters to be statically defined in a M> per-cpu struct. The reasoning was to remove 'struct vmmeter' from the 'struct pcpu', which sounds inline with your desire to remote struct vmmeter from the kernel at all. Maintainance wise, it is much easier not to bloat 'struct pcpu' with various global statistics, but keep them as counter(9)s instead. Indeed, what's the big difference between TCP statistics and VM statistics, why treat them differently? Performance wise, I haven't seen any regressions when collapsed multiple entities of struct vmmeter sitting in struct pcpu, into single one with counter(9)s. -- Gleb Smirnoff
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20170913223231.GN1055>