Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 13:06:20 -0500 From: Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: src-committers@freebsd.org, Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>, Alan Cox <alc@rice.edu>, "Jayachandran C." <jchandra@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, Oleksandr Tymoshenko <gonzo@bluezbox.com>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r243631 - in head/sys: kern sys Message-ID: <50F2F79C.7040109@mu.org> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmokjZ_vpcmYeD65pWJN5tfhqn6yDXrFFcXf8dvYc55tQtg@mail.gmail.com> References: <201211272119.qARLJxXV061083@svn.freebsd.org> <ABB3E29B-91F3-4C25-8FAB-869BBD7459E1@bluezbox.com> <50C1BC90.90106@freebsd.org> <50C25A27.4060007@bluezbox.com> <50C26331.6030504@freebsd.org> <50C26AE9.4020600@bluezbox.com> <50C3A3D3.9000804@freebsd.org> <50C3AF72.4010902@rice.edu> <330405A1-312A-45A5-BB86-4969478D8BBD@bluezbox.com> <50D03E83.8060908@rice.edu> <50DD081E.8000409@bluezbox.com> <50EB1841.5030006@bluezbox.com> <50EB22D2.6090103@rice.edu> <50EB415F.8020405@freebsd.org> <CA%2B7sy7CkdoyScOEDEXWuwJxjCS5zTcC8_fu9isCeTFxT8opNJQ@mail.gmail.com> <50F04FE5.7010406@rice.edu> <CA%2B7sy7D=ZjTLirGW3BVGcAu0h8-dWpib%2BYziUjEqegOL9J4adw@mail.gmail.com> <CAJ-VmonLoL4E3UsNwx87p2FuHXTbJe7wFs9hBn5Zmr7TTQOSkg@mail.gmail.com> <50F1BD69.4060104@mu.org> <CAJ-VmokjZ_vpcmYeD65pWJN5tfhqn6yDXrFFcXf8dvYc55tQtg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 1/12/13 10:32 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 12 January 2013 11:45, Alfred Perlstein <bright@mu.org> wrote: > >> I'm not sure if regressing to the waterfall method of development is a good >> idea at this point. >> >> I see a light at the end of the tunnel and we to continue to just handle >> these minor corner cases as we progress. >> >> If we move to a model where a minor bug is grounds to completely remove >> helpful code then nothing will ever get done. >> > Allocating 512MB worth of callwheels on a 16GB MIPS machine is a > little silly, don't you think? > > That suggests to me that the extent of which maxfiles/maxusers/etc > percolates the codebase wasn't totally understood by those who wish to > change it. > > I'd rather see some more investigative work into outlining things that > need fixing and start fixing those, rather than "just change stuff and > fix whatever issues creep up." > > I kinda hope we all understand what we're working on in the kernel a > little better than that. Cool! I'm glad people are now aware of the callwheel allocation being insane with large maxusers. I saw this about a month ago (if not longer), but since there were half a dozen people calling me an imbecile who hadn't really yet read the code I didn't want to inflame them more by fixing that with "a hack". (actually a simple fix). A simple fix is to clamp callwheel size to the previous result of a maxusers of 384 and call it a day. However the simplicity of that approach would probably inflame too many feelings so I am unsure as how to proceed. Any ideas? -Alfred
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?50F2F79C.7040109>