Date: Thu, 26 Aug 1999 19:08:08 +0200 From: Poul-Henning Kamp <phk@critter.freebsd.dk> To: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams) Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/isofs/cd9660 cd9660_vfsops.c src/sys/kern vfs_subr.c vfs_syscalls.c src/sys/miscfs/devfs devfs_tree.c src/sys/miscfs/specfs spec_vnops.c src/sys/nfs nfs_subs.c src/sys/svr4 svr4_fcntl.c src/sys/sys conf.h lock.h vnode.h ... Message-ID: <1183.935687288@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 26 Aug 1999 10:47:19 MDT." <199908261647.KAA14805@mt.sri.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <199908261647.KAA14805@mt.sri.com>, Nate Williams writes: >> Simplify the handling of VCHR and VBLK vnodes using the new dev_t: >> >> Make the alias list a SLIST. >> >> Drop the "fast recycling" optimization of vnodes (including >> the returning of a prexisting but stale vnode from checkalias). >> It doesn't buy us anything now that we don't hardlimit >> vnodes anymore. > >Will this removal cause us to run out of KVM sooner on busy servers >because we are not GC'ing them as often? I actually don't think this code can ever have done much, and since we changed the vnode recycle criteria I doubt it did anything noticeable and it may not even have been beneficial. The code used the fact that there a special vnode didn't have state to reclaim it as soon as it met it, but only if it were the same hash-chain. I think the only noticeable impact of this change will be code clarity. Poul-Henning PS: But if you see signs of vnode leakage by all means yell, I could have overlooked something... -- Poul-Henning Kamp FreeBSD coreteam member phk@FreeBSD.ORG "Real hackers run -current on their laptop." FreeBSD -- It will take a long time before progress goes too far! To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1183.935687288>