From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jun 8 17:26:36 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6767A16A400 for ; Fri, 8 Jun 2007 17:26:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from asmrookie@gmail.com) Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.168]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE1F813C447 for ; Fri, 8 Jun 2007 17:26:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from asmrookie@gmail.com) Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id u2so1143527uge for ; Fri, 08 Jun 2007 10:26:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=W0NXU3dBiLdm0R9Ccpb/92wmcukGxdLr/8PkT/1DkctUuI6FKiO0Lqf2Wq5IkN0baIlASUhJlCiVXnM+k2bMZCJ83WW5ZBOTpP3vZ+sHZtMnrri471ppl3c2vKpyjQsCA92qq3/1Ot+dGaDsp6yquBZsxd3LwtAYgM2FfiistV8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:sender:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references:x-google-sender-auth; b=ZwsMLPTHYEI6nv4rb8hquedEycg0BwDxe0jaQqW+KTgZzYQA46IsO8a46ZvF07aXFxOxd6UpdffzxEsLbBWvOgWq5nhnPHhjvzV5DeCApvXQho3hgkwmEI649q6rytEUk8RaFyi/F9WLOabOzaqVYTu+cYJDf074us1XqFt/Ah4= Received: by 10.78.156.6 with SMTP id d6mr1349499hue.1181323595444; Fri, 08 Jun 2007 10:26:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.78.120.9 with HTTP; Fri, 8 Jun 2007 10:26:35 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3bbf2fe10706081026l27bef70pd2d1d32c7e57d442@mail.gmail.com> Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2007 19:26:35 +0200 From: "Attilio Rao" Sender: asmrookie@gmail.com To: "Jeff Roberson" In-Reply-To: <20070607135511.P606@10.0.0.1> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20070529105856.L661@10.0.0.1> <20070601154833.O4207@besplex.bde.org> <20070601014601.I799@10.0.0.1> <20070601200348.G6201@delplex.bde.org> <20070601123530.B606@10.0.0.1> <20070604160036.N1084@besplex.bde.org> <46652D17.5090903@FreeBSD.org> <20070605214404.X47001@delplex.bde.org> <20070606152352.H606@10.0.0.1> <20070607135511.P606@10.0.0.1> X-Google-Sender-Auth: 2f9a5fccf838ea54 Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Updated rusage patch X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 17:26:36 -0000 2007/6/7, Jeff Roberson : > The patch at http://people.freebsd.org/~jeff/rusage3.diff fixes points 1 > and 2 as well as the p_runtime iniitialization problem. This moves the > collection of child rusage back into exit1() and changes the exiting > threads to accumulate their rusage into p_ru under protection of the > process spinlock. This also removes the gross lock/unlock of proc slock > (formerly sched_lock) from wait and implements something more sensible. I have a question: it is fair to assume that extra per-proc spinlock acquisitions/removals on the PRS_ZOMBIE state are orthogonal to this problem? They should belong to another 'fix', shouldn't? Thanks, Attilio -- Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein