Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2020 12:22:59 -0800 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org> To: Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com> Cc: Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org>, src-committers@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, svn-src-head@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r357004 - in head/sys: kern sys Message-ID: <20200127202259.GW1268@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <202001242023.00OKNXlS094989@slippy.cwsent.com> References: <202001230124.00N1OlXi029506@repo.freebsd.org> <fb6e84b6-85a9-3252-c27a-bb9ee7ca203f@selasky.org> <23f272a4-c997-a454-19d6-10392713e71f@selasky.org> <20200124170532.GO1268@FreeBSD.org> <7d7db96d-26b1-1d2b-9f8d-a3f8fbe8c33c@selasky.org> <202001242023.00OKNXlS094989@slippy.cwsent.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 12:23:33PM -0800, Cy Schubert wrote: C> > Let not the network epoch become the new Giant of EPOCH's. There might C> > be realtime constraints for EPOCH's aswell. C> C> I also had that concern yesterday. C> C> Obtaining an EPOCH higher up the call stack or lower down depends on the C> workload. Are there any measurements that moving the EPOCHs higher in the C> call stack improves one workload (and configuration) or another? Could one C> type of workload or configuration benefit from this at the expense of C> another workload or configuration? Can you imagine a workload where calling epoch_enter/exit more often but for a shorter period of execution would be beneficial that calling it once for a packet? -- Gleb Smirnoff
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20200127202259.GW1268>