From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Nov 12 09:40:54 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7176C7D9 for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 09:40:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-da0-f54.google.com (mail-da0-f54.google.com [209.85.210.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BA968FC12 for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 09:40:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-da0-f54.google.com with SMTP id z9so2765755dad.13 for ; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 01:40:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=+SlT3zrrOfRFpe0GjVGC9sjsFrUdvBBmzxC1iddacQI=; b=SLa33iwi8inn+BBL7N5dFw8jLgOHNmzFIT/82skwqXnJn8MSWnd9FO1QnhjtIGH3Bc OglwTFZEjpM9MTbQNZA/PP/j9suzMNqKC+ECIIxKQlXFRHuikjuoYKj6UvpykDNbqhen O0/Q5ljjMhDjmOXMa1KPF5KlUClIzzD9b45WgLJ2FbM8g74PUbuj10BUuhgtfbVPrC0b Q5v0XL0arBDZYiRdMQoKO3s8tGzBmxRfnfpic2uuUD5UQ4ddnA+YlWyRY0iGjtisYRzp Y1wK1mIyen1Nl7nsUMNcLXN+mfnQvGdrD00ID54KJ6vbBt38olUNwFNAVBbbAhlZJzoI kJEw== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.69.0.8 with SMTP id au8mr49338259pbd.58.1352713248832; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 01:40:48 -0800 (PST) Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com Received: by 10.68.124.130 with HTTP; Mon, 12 Nov 2012 01:40:48 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <2CB113BD-D223-4BCF-AAB8-F3D3FA962168@mu.org> References: <20121112003215.238950@gmx.com> <2CB113BD-D223-4BCF-AAB8-F3D3FA962168@mu.org> Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 01:40:48 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: t999xq202iAsn76NVVJJH3_bVz4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Memory reserves or lack thereof From: Adrian Chadd To: Alfred Perlstein Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" , Dieter BSD X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 12 Nov 2012 09:40:54 -0000 On 11 November 2012 20:24, Alfred Perlstein wrote: > I think very few of the m_nowaits actually need the reserve behavior. We should probably switch away from it digging that deep by default and introduce a flag and/or a per thread flag to set the behavior. There's already a perfectly fine flag - M_WAITOK. Just don't hold any locks, right? :) Adrian