Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2013 10:36:51 +0200 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> To: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> Cc: freebsd-acpi@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: uma for acpi object cache Message-ID: <51024423.5020306@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <51019AAE.10501@FreeBSD.org> References: <20130122175629.GA1714@garage.freebsd.pl> <51008661.4060006@FreeBSD.org> <510101B4.4030409@FreeBSD.org> <51017D79.6060202@FreeBSD.org> <51018223.4030702@FreeBSD.org> <51019AAE.10501@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 24/01/2013 22:33 Jung-uk Kim said the following: > On 2013-01-24 13:49:07 -0500, Andriy Gapon wrote: >> on 24/01/2013 20:29 Jung-uk Kim said the following: >>> BTW, I tried something like that long ago. In fact, the first >>> attempt goes all the way back to this patch (warning: it's naive, >>> broken, and overly complicated): >>> >>> http://people.freebsd.org/~jkim/acpica/OsdCache.diff >>> >>> I have more up-to-date and correct patch to use UMA but I'm still >>> not 100% convinced whether we want to do it or not. > >> Hmm, your patch looks a bit more complicated than mine. What is all >> that extra stuff that you have there? > > The main issue was AcpiOsPurgeCache(). For example, we didn't have > anything like Linux's kmem_cache_shrink() at the time: > > http://www.kernel.org/doc/htmldocs/kernel-api/API-kmem-cache-shrink.html > > It seems you implemented that with zone_drain() but it wasn't > available until this commit: > > http://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=166213 > > Also, I had to make sure the cache is empty before we do > uma_zdestroy(), so on and so forth. OK, I see. I don't think that any of that is really needed (now). If you don't object I'll commit my variant in 1-2 weeks from now. -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?51024423.5020306>