From owner-svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Apr 11 18:23:09 2014
Return-Path: <owner-svn-src-all@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: svn-src-all@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1BA6A48C;
 Fri, 11 Apr 2014 18:23:09 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (bigwig.baldwin.cx [IPv6:2001:470:1f11:75::1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6CAF1C6C;
 Fri, 11 Apr 2014 18:23:08 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from jhbbsd.localnet (unknown [209.249.190.124])
 by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DF287B939;
 Fri, 11 Apr 2014 14:23:07 -0400 (EDT)
From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: svn commit: r264321 - head/sys/netinet
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 14:17:57 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (FreeBSD/8.4-CBSD-20130906; KDE/4.5.5; amd64; ; )
References: <201404101815.s3AIFZx3065541@svn.freebsd.org>
 <2775D53A-8728-4E8D-B53D-ADC00649D737@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <2775D53A-8728-4E8D-B53D-ADC00649D737@FreeBSD.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201404111417.57601.jhb@freebsd.org>
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7
 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Fri, 11 Apr 2014 14:23:08 -0400 (EDT)
Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org,
 src-committers@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for &quot;
 user&quot; and &quot; projects&quot; \)" <svn-src-all.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/svn-src-all>,
 <mailto:svn-src-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-all/>
List-Post: <mailto:svn-src-all@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:svn-src-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-all>,
 <mailto:svn-src-all-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 18:23:09 -0000

On Friday, April 11, 2014 6:56:16 am Bjoern A. Zeeb wrote:
> On 10 Apr 2014, at 18:15 , John Baldwin <jhb@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
> 
> > +/* Global timewait lock */
> > +static VNET_DEFINE(struct rwlock, tw_lock);
> > +#define	V_tw_lock			VNET(tw_lock)
> 
> Why do we virtualise individual locks now?   Usually we only do for those 
embedded into larger virtualised data structures?  Does this align with an 
independently virtualised data structure (in which case the lock should be 
part of that)?

The larger structure is currently a single TAILQ:

static VNET_DEFINE(TAILQ_HEAD(, tcptw), twq_2msl);
#define	V_twq_2msl			VNET(twq_2msl)

Would seem overkill to make a separate struct just for the TAILQ_HEAD and
lock?

-- 
John Baldwin