Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2015 09:39:55 +0100 From: Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org> To: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" <svn-src-head@freebsd.org>, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>, "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org>, "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, Warner Losh <imp@bsdimp.com> Subject: Re: svn commit: r277213 - in head: share/man/man9 sys/kern sys/ofed/include/linux sys/sys Message-ID: <54C0B75B.9070305@selasky.org> In-Reply-To: <20150122081023.GT42409@kib.kiev.ua> References: <201501151532.t0FFWV2Y037455@svn.freebsd.org> <CAJ-Vmok0GXZoojyi=jE=b5D-d338APztaf3Pw0_AAQ-173XSWw@mail.gmail.com> <54BDD9E1.6090505@selasky.org> <20150120075126.GA42409@kib.kiev.ua> <54BE0AAA.4050104@selasky.org> <20150120090057.GD42409@kib.kiev.ua> <54BE21F0.6010602@selasky.org> <7C692107-51CF-4DFA-BD6C-623D56893150@bsdimp.com> <54C0A352.8090701@selasky.org> <20150122081023.GT42409@kib.kiev.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 01/22/15 09:10, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 08:14:26AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote: >> On 01/22/15 06:26, Warner Losh wrote: >> > >>>> The code simply needs an update. It is not broken in any ways - right? If it is not broken, fixing it is not that urgent. >>> >>> Radically changing the performance characteristics is breaking the code. Performance regression in the TCP stack is urgent to fix. > >> Not being able to enumerate what all the consumers are that use this and >> provide an analysis about why they aren?t important to fix is a bug in >> your process, and in your interaction with the project. We simply do not >> operate that way. > Right, I completely agree with this statement. > > >> Hi, >> >> My plan is to work out a patch for the TCP stack today, which only >> change the callout_init() call or its function. This should not need any >> particular review. I'll let adrian test and review, because I think he >> is closer to me timezone wise and you're standing on my head saying its >> urgent. If he is still not happy, I can back my change out. Else it >> remains in -current AS-IS. > TCP regresssion was noted, so it is brought in front. There is nothing > else which makes TCP issue different from other (hidden) issues. > > =========================== >> MFC to 10-stable I can delay for sure until >> all issues you report to me are fixed. > =========================== > > Sigh, you still do not understand. It is your duty to identify all pieces > which break after your change. After that, we can argue whether each of > them is critical or not to allow the migration. But this must have been > done before the KPI change hit the tree. > Hi, Are you saying that pieces of code that runs completely unlocked using "volatile" as only synchronization mechanism is better than what I would call a temporary and hopefully short TCP stack performance loss? I don't understand? How frequently do you reboot your boxes? Maybe one every day? And you don't care? --HPS
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?54C0B75B.9070305>