Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2012 10:14:29 +0200 From: Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com>, Davide Italiano <davide@freebsd.org>, FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [RFC/RFT] calloutng Message-ID: <50CED465.3010501@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmom0jv6851wQkjyMB2pVrpQGNabHMVYXk4iHNZFs0dmptQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <50CCAB99.4040308@FreeBSD.org> <50CE5B54.3050905@FreeBSD.org> <CAJ-VmonUqe1BGrCGpwyantyr=iXPS30HrPCRj9dhfGi2Q49pvg@mail.gmail.com> <BE7E2041-5B33-44DD-B917-3BFB6347FB07@gmail.com> <CAJ-Vmom0jv6851wQkjyMB2pVrpQGNabHMVYXk4iHNZFs0dmptQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 17.12.2012 05:38, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 16 December 2012 18:31, Garrett Cooper <yanegomi@gmail.com> wrote: > >>> Would you mind approaching some of the cluster peeps and seeing if >>> they'll run this up on the ref10* boxes and VMs, just to get some >>> further exposure? >> >> And maybe tinderbox..? > > Tinderbox is a great idea. > > Maybe hit up the altq/pf using crowd and see if they'll test this stuff out too? It would be good to test, though I know that at least dummynet is written awful from the point of this project with its callout_reset(&dn_timeout, 1, dummynet, NULL); It should work, but kill most of power benefits. I was promised it will be fixed after this project end. > What else gets heavily callout /timer driven? Try some computational > workloads that stress the fairness of ULE/4BSD, maybe? Schedulers are driven directly by hardclock()/statclock(), so fairness is not affected here. If CPU is not idle, it will receive full set of required events with maximum available precision. -- Alexander Motin
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?50CED465.3010501>