Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 12:57:01 -0700 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian.chadd@gmail.com> To: Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu> Cc: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>, Jeff Roberson <jroberson@jroberson.net> Subject: Re: UMA_ZONE_CACHESPREAD and uma_zsecond_add Message-ID: <CAJ-VmomSPt09BSzRYf1DE74k8jCChuhy83KgSGbe4uZT2hm0Cw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <035f48ea-8722-f697-cc71-cb8ee772e062@cs.duke.edu> References: <76a47d9a-da39-75f4-5794-24724d0befc7@FreeBSD.org> <035f48ea-8722-f697-cc71-cb8ee772e062@cs.duke.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Is there any reason to nuke it right now? Is it preventing other work from progressing? -adrian On 12 March 2017 at 11:55, Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu> wrote: > On 03/08/2017 10:56, Andriy Gapon wrote: >> >> >> First, the history of UMA_ZONE_CACHESPREAD and uma_zsecond_add(): >> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/2008-December/008800.html >> >> Now, more than 8 years after those features were introduced, we still >> don't have >> a single in-tree consumer for them. >> Does anyone use those features out of tree? >> Does anyone still have plans to make use of them? >> Will anyone get sad if those features get garbage collected? > > > This is something that I keep getting suggestions to try at Netflix > on our 100G boxes. From the description, it really seems like > it might help us to have a few data types allocated like this. > > Can you give me, say, one month to look into this before axing > it? > > Thanks, > > Drew > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-arch@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-VmomSPt09BSzRYf1DE74k8jCChuhy83KgSGbe4uZT2hm0Cw>