Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2014 14:05:50 +0800 From: Xin Li <delphij@delphij.net> To: John-Mark Gurney <jmg@funkthat.com>, d@delphij.net Cc: "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org>, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org>, Xin LI <delphij@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r269964 - head/sys/kern Message-ID: <5413DEBE.7060301@delphij.net> In-Reply-To: <20140913052241.GU82175@funkthat.com> References: <201408140531.s7E5VeWw077792@svn.freebsd.org> <CAJ-Vmo=dx8Z6mX616A-SfzQqfT97F7h_kd-6KiWU2QW=YBSm=w@mail.gmail.com> <5413C6C1.7090308@delphij.net> <20140913052241.GU82175@funkthat.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 On 9/13/14 1:22 PM, John-Mark Gurney wrote: > Xin Li wrote this message on Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 12:23 +0800: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 >> >> On 9/13/14 3:41 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote: >>> Hi guys, >>> >>> Both r269963 and r269964 have broken the MIPS platforms with >>> smaller amounts of RAM (< 64MB.) >>> >>> Sean noticed it and filed a bug: >>> >>> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=193465 >>> >>> Can we please figure out what changed? Otherwise I'm going to >>> revert these two changes until we figure out what happened. >> >> Could you please try if this would mitigate the issue? >> >> Index: sys/kern/kern_malloc.c >> =================================================================== >> >> - - --- sys/kern/kern_malloc.c (revision 271494) >> +++ sys/kern/kern_malloc.c (working copy) @@ -717,6 +717,8 >> @@ kmeminit(void) * a given architecture. */ mem_size = >> vm_cnt.v_page_count; + if (mem_size <= 32768) /* delphij >> XXX 128MB */ + kmem_zmax = PAGE_SIZE; >> >> if (vm_kmem_size_scale < 1) vm_kmem_size_scale = >> VM_KMEM_SIZE_SCALE; >> > > Has more research been done on this? My 64MB AVILA board boots > fine, and ath attaches fine... It's theoretically possible that my change brings a regression for small system, as the larger allocation units now "caches" the allocation instead of returning them immediately. Sean also confirms that reverting the two changes only would fix the issue, so I think we should use some autotune here. Cheers, -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJUE96+AAoJEJW2GBstM+nsb6AP/RrwGeuuNUVpfHhOqIaZEBm3 vtYINve38oxTF9D3FCONWpib7/ZggSfdN7kkSJ5oKNbjJtrbhqqIrhuKNyo03L7o WbR3TLam0+8tCYL7EYe93D6wqWlkyPZkOv4G1amh2UxwWnfhP/uruLA/LJPm/z/+ 41gT2DHRUDj9JmeDt4R7EPIO7UOZ9uqs+dJ8mpx0hvxvTUgxR94umtX5/Ijmp6Fj MHuiVjgkJ9DM6RHlXECenYj8gTEbwV8MVNQhoIrlqDSbZsy+O4FMek3byFy6OL9U pPd9O/QDHCfPoOK12RULv3+7c6NhXXiVYU3RoBrwDEJx5XhfG8bvrdRZha2JgJkz KwyVBKqMXH6QjhRFtisgd630cchew7XO+21TK5zeKt0sad6CETLJyIsiHuOkHYI3 vFkIPGu3uF9YFMzacqiQKydhaN/6chQYh2vlmxpcnuiP3ispfJjZyPyCCs1vadip 5uJkG0bIHb/kQZJ8LouEk+W9QA0XUlIaYbP0JxzTMqvH5iyqMTId9XgsVgqWK/th XrCGzXuoi5fQw0NauhdKoihJeJ/Ut+7cblv6h7IpmLFEDUJZvVtgYcaZOsOhC2FG 4C//ENzbcioBimvujnktvOJEwT7XpoBwuIcfIVoz/tMZYgx3y5w1mRIGUoh1/XAP kTQmYqaG5A1CrBEFPeOI =i4ee -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5413DEBE.7060301>