From owner-freebsd-net Tue Jun 18 21:43:25 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from angelica.unixdaemons.com (angelica.unixdaemons.com [209.148.64.135]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 879B437B410; Tue, 18 Jun 2002 21:43:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from angelica.unixdaemons.com (bmilekic@localhost.unixdaemons.com [127.0.0.1]) by angelica.unixdaemons.com (8.12.4/8.12.1) with ESMTP id g5J4hEXU030242; Wed, 19 Jun 2002 00:43:14 -0400 (EDT) X-Authentication-Warning: angelica.unixdaemons.com: Host bmilekic@localhost.unixdaemons.com [127.0.0.1] claimed to be angelica.unixdaemons.com Received: (from bmilekic@localhost) by angelica.unixdaemons.com (8.12.4/8.12.1/Submit) id g5J4hDBt030241; Wed, 19 Jun 2002 00:43:13 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from bmilekic) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2002 00:43:13 -0400 From: Bosko Milekic To: "Kenneth D. Merry" Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG, net@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: new zero copy sockets snapshot Message-ID: <20020619004313.A29911@unixdaemons.com> References: <20020618223635.A98350@panzer.kdm.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: <20020618223635.A98350@panzer.kdm.org>; from ken@kdm.org on Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 10:36:36PM -0600 Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org On Tue, Jun 18, 2002 at 10:36:36PM -0600, Kenneth D. Merry wrote: > > I've released a new zero copy sockets snapshot, against -current from June > 18th, 2002. > > http://people.FreeBSD.org/~ken/zero_copy > > The fixes that went into this snapshot: > > - Take mutex locking out of ti_attach(), it isn't really needed. > As long as we can assume that probes of successive ti(4) instances > happen sequentially, we'll be safe in doing this. Thanks to John > Baldwin for pointing out the solution to that problem. (The lock in > ti_attach() was causing all sorts of WITNESS warnings when > bus_setup_intr() was called.) > > - Added a new routine, vm_object_allocate_wait(). This is a variant of > vm_object_allocate() that allows the user to specify whether the > uma_zalloc() call inside vm_object_allocate_wait() is called with > M_WAITOK or M_NOWAIT. This eliminates a WITNESS warning caused when > jumbo_vm_init() calls vm_object_allocate() with the jumbo lock held, and > potentially gives other callers the option of eliminating the mandatory > wait on the uma_zalloc() call. I think this problem was fixed in recent -CURRENT by JeffR. Notably, the VM system should not allow itself to recurse on itself when called with M_NOWAIT. > (vm_object_allocate() now just calls vm_object_allocate_wait() with the > proper argument.) > > With those fixes, plus several fixes that have gone into -current over the > past week or so, the zero copy sockets code runs without any WITNESS > warnings at all now. > > Ken > -- > Kenneth Merry > ken@kdm.org > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message > -- Bosko Milekic bmilekic@unixdaemons.com bmilekic@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in the body of the message