Date: Fri, 4 Jun 2004 11:59:02 -0700 From: Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com> To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Cc: Bosko Milekic <bmilekic@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: [HEADS-UP] mbuma is in the tree Message-ID: <200406041159.02229.sam@errno.com> In-Reply-To: <20040604112733.GC98227@cell.sick.ru> References: <20040531215101.GA60299@freefall.freebsd.org> <20040603151911.GB12727@Odin.AC.HMC.Edu> <20040604112733.GC98227@cell.sick.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Friday 04 June 2004 04:27 am, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > On Thu, Jun 03, 2004 at 08:19:11AM -0700, Brooks Davis wrote: > B> > On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 10:56:52AM -0700, Sam Leffler wrote: > B> > S> allocated using this mechanism. I did it once for vlan tags but > botched it B> > S> (didn't handle module references properly) so backed it. > But there's no B> > S> reason someone cannot redo it or convert other > heavily used fixed size tags B> > S> to use a zone. > B> > > B> > Have you saved your efforts? May I look at them? > B> > B> They are in the CVS history of sys/net/if_vlan.c. > > I see now, thanks. > > Question to Sam: have you performed any tests? Is this definitely > true, that UMAllocing in special zone is faster than general malloc()? Allocating from a zone was noticeable for gige interfaces, especially on my SMP configuration (which was running w/o Giant). For non-gige interfaces the overhead of using malloc is not noticeable (as I reported when I first converted vlan handling over to use tags). Regardless the point was that you can already use a zone for tags if you want. Sam
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200406041159.02229.sam>