Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 01 Sep 2001 13:22:13 -0700 (PDT)
From:      John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Matt Dillon <dillon@earth.backplane.com>
Cc:        cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG, Peter Wemm <peter@wemm.org>
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_prof.c kern_ntptime.c kern_xxx
Message-ID:  <XFMail.010901132213.jhb@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <200109010827.f818RW370778@earth.backplane.com>

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

On 01-Sep-01 Matt Dillon wrote:
>     Believe me, I know these patches are breaking the P4 merge and also
>     playing havoc with Alfred's and JHB's stuff.  I'm not doing it on
>     purpose.  Frankly, I'm surprised that not one person beyond Alfred has
>     done any Giant pushdown work on the syscalls since I added the MPSAFE
>     flag to the syscall generator months and months ago.   Well, it needs
>     to be done.

Actually, p4 handles 3-way merges quite well.  It probably won't step on my
toes very much.

>     I'm also annoyed that so much incremental work is being done in P4 rather
>     then in the main tree.  Julian's KSE stuff is an all-or-nothing deal
>     and P4 makes sense for a little while, but neither the proc lock, or
>     the struct filedesc stuff, or the struct file stuff is all-or-nothing...
>     it can all be done incrementally direct to the main tree as long as
>     you test the resulting kernel before you commit it.  Instead I'm seeing
>     a kitchen-sink approach being taken when it is entirely unnecessary...
>     we have Giant available, it makes taking an incremental approach
>     possible!

Mostly because I haven't done more than compile my current set of proc locking
changes.  I'm using p4 to store work revisions of files before I can test them
and commit them.  Presently I'm running into a wall with a seemingly simply
change wrt proc locking and sendsig causing an Alpha SMP kernel to blow up my
dual Alpha test machine but work fine on my UP alpha test machine.

>     Also, since I'm in critique mode... for gods sake, LAY OFF THE
>     MULTI-LINE MACROS AND INLINES FOR COMMON PROCEDURE CALLS!!  The bloat
>     they are causing is unbelievable.

Do take into account the difference that having debugging on makes.  A
debugging kernel is going to be bloated, yes, but the non-debugging one won't
be.  Other OS's with multithreaded kernels inline the simple first test for
mutex acquire/releases to optimize for the common case.

>                                               -Matt

-- 

John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> -- http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/
PGP Key: http://www.baldwin.cx/~john/pgpkey.asc
"Power Users Use the Power to Serve!"  -  http://www.FreeBSD.org/

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.010901132213.jhb>