Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sat, 22 Dec 2001 19:34:45 -0800
From:      David Greenman <dg@root.com>
To:        Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Cc:        Mike Silbersack <silby@silby.com>, Matt Dillon <dillon@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/sio sio.c
Message-ID:  <20011222193445.E24034@nexus.root.com>
In-Reply-To: <20011223143011.G10441-100000@gamplex.bde.org>; from bde@zeta.org.au on Sun, Dec 23, 2001 at 02:41:16PM %2B1100
References:  <20011222191321.B24034@nexus.root.com> <20011223143011.G10441-100000@gamplex.bde.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>On Sat, 22 Dec 2001, David Greenman wrote:
>
>> >The driver used to have dynamic fifo trigger reduction, mainly to
>> >support many active sio devices, but this was found harmful and backed
>> >out:
>> >
>> >! RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/dev/sio/sio.c,v
>> >! Working file: sio.c
>> >! head: 1.353
>> >! ...
>> >! ----------------------------
>> >! revision 1.53
>> >! date: 1994/09/21 19:39:25;  author: davidg;  state: Exp;  lines: +3 -1
>> >! #if 0'd evil dynamic fifo trigger level adjustment; it just bit me and
>> >! a couple of other people again.
>> >! ----------------------------
>>
>>    You know, it's really weird to see stuff that I wrote from more than
>> 7 years ago. I can only imagine how Kirk feels when he sees log messages
>> from the 80's. :-)
>
>At least if they have been untouched for that long then they were probably
>correct :-).

   Correct for the time, perhaps, but hardware has gotten faster and FreeBSD
kernel latency has apparantly gotten worse.

>>    As I recall, the dynamic adjustment increased interrupt overhead each
>> time it ratcheted down, causing it to be even more likely to lower it
>> further until it was "1", disabling the overhead reduction benefits of
>> the fifo completely. The cure became worse than the disease.
>
>I once planned to bring this back, at least as an option, with the
>ratcheting down limited to 1 step.  I never got around to this because
>the problem seemed to have gone away except for unusual hardware
>combinations.

   Perhaps reduce it to the mid-point (8), but not below that.

-DG

David Greenman
Co-founder, The FreeBSD Project - http://www.freebsd.org
President, TeraSolutions, Inc. - http://www.terasolutions.com
Pave the road of life with opportunities.

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?20011222193445.E24034>