Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 14:33:01 -0500 From: Tom Rhodes <trhodes@FreeBSD.org> To: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/amd64/conf NOTES src/sys/i386/conf NOTES src/sys/pc98/conf NOTES Message-ID: <20050223143301.2666e07b@mobile.pittgoth.com> In-Reply-To: <20050223085811.GB21254@cell.sick.ru> References: <200502230413.j1N4DBKH008870@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050223071246.GA73994@ip.net.ua> <20050223075748.GB20887@cell.sick.ru> <20050223083639.GA88262@ip.net.ua> <20050223085811.GB21254@cell.sick.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 11:58:11 +0300 Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 23, 2005 at 10:36:39AM +0200, Ruslan Ermilov wrote: > R> > Actually, the block with error can be safely removed from kern_poll.c before > R> > we polish our patches. There is no problem running SMP + polling. Probably, > R> > there were some problems in the past. > R> > > R> > I think the block can be removed now and MFCed before 5.4-RELEASE. I'm quite > R> > sure that our patches for Giant-less polling will not be MFCed soon. > R> > > R> Take a look at http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/polling/, the last > R> paragraph on the page. I believe it still holds true these days. > > I completely agree here, but this is not a reason to deny such configuration. > What is nice in polling, is that some amount of CPU resources is reserved > for userland. So, if box is not doing a pure forwarding job, but is a web > server which is loaded both by userland applications and interrupts, a setup > with polling and SMP will be very appropriate. So, I remove the note I added and kill the block and we let users test and report problems? This may help you guys get better patches in the tree. Comments? -- Tom Rhodes
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050223143301.2666e07b>