From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG  Sat Aug  6 23:19:23 2005
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org
Delivered-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D43A516A41F;
	Sat,  6 Aug 2005 23:19:21 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from davidxu@freebsd.org)
Message-ID: <42F54578.40609@freebsd.org>
Date: Sun, 07 Aug 2005 07:19:20 +0800
From: David Xu <davidxu@freebsd.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US;
	rv:1.7.10) Gecko/20050806
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org>
References: <200508061031.j76AVR6P072556@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<20050806160155.GA3944@xor.obsecurity.org>
	<42F4E3AF.8000001@samsco.org>
	<20050806170813.GA36888@xor.obsecurity.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050806170813.GA36888@xor.obsecurity.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org>,
	src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/i386/conf GENERIC
X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree <cvs-src.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-src>,
	<mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-src>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-src@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-src>,
	<mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 06 Aug 2005 23:19:23 -0000

Kris Kennaway wrote:

>On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 10:22:07AM -0600, Scott Long wrote:
>  
>
>>Kris Kennaway wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>On Sat, Aug 06, 2005 at 10:31:27AM +0000, David Xu wrote:
>>>
>>>      
>>>
>>>>davidxu     2005-08-06 10:31:27 UTC
>>>>
>>>>FreeBSD src repository
>>>>
>>>>Modified files:
>>>>  sys/i386/conf        GENERIC 
>>>>Log:
>>>>Make ULE as default scheduler, allow it to be tested more widely.
>>>>        
>>>>
>>>Why?  It's already known to cause panics, shouldn't you have fixed
>>>those first before inflicting them on users?
>>>
>>>Kris
>>>      
>>>
>>Actually, he has fixed a number of panics in ULE in the last week.  I
>>agree with turning ULE back on by default in order to get more exposure,
>>but I would rather it have happened after 6.0-R so that we could
>>concentrate on the release.  David, would you mind reverting this until
>>after 6.0-R?  Thanks,
>>    
>>
>
>In the meantime I'd be happy to run ULE on some package build machines
>to test, but I think you should also ask the many people who reported
>other problems with ULE (e.g. panics on SMP, problems with priorities,
>interactive performance and general performance) to re-test and see if
>their problems persist.
>
>Kris
>
>  
>
I have reverted it, I will turn it on after 6.0-R.
but as you are saying the panics on SMP, I have fixed it, as least I can
not reproduce it on my dual PIII machine.
In my test, ULE always outperforms 4BSD, your test may vary though.
Interactive performance is good, but not as good as 4BSD, it has to be
improved, that's why I want to turn it on as a default.

Regards,
David Xu