From owner-freebsd-current@freebsd.org Sun Feb 18 20:34:17 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 66B73F016E8 for ; Sun, 18 Feb 2018 20:34:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 07A9D69EAD for ; Sun, 18 Feb 2018 20:34:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id BB37EF016E7; Sun, 18 Feb 2018 20:34:16 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: current@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5A74F016E6 for ; Sun, 18 Feb 2018 20:34:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cell.glebi.us (glebi.us [96.95.210.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "cell.glebi.us", Issuer "cell.glebi.us" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2EEE869EA8; Sun, 18 Feb 2018 20:34:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cell.glebi.us (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cell.glebi.us (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id w1IKXwgm006759 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 18 Feb 2018 12:33:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from glebius@localhost) by cell.glebi.us (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id w1IKXwld006758; Sun, 18 Feb 2018 12:33:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: cell.glebi.us: glebius set sender to glebius@FreeBSD.org using -f Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2018 12:33:58 -0800 From: Gleb Smirnoff To: Andriy Gapon Cc: Andrew Reilly , kib@FreeBSD.org, current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Since last week (today) current on my Ryzen box is unstable Message-ID: <20180218203358.GG93303@FreeBSD.org> References: <0CEA9D55-D488-42EC-BBDE-D0B7CE58BAEA@bigpond.net.au> <20180218023545.GE93303@FreeBSD.org> <431f3e00-c66a-8e2e-6c61-a315a6353d1d@FreeBSD.org> <20180218132623.GF93303@FreeBSD.org> <359681a7-3885-820e-1ac8-19254c83d1ad@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <359681a7-3885-820e-1ac8-19254c83d1ad@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.3 (2018-01-21) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.25 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2018 20:34:17 -0000 On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 10:15:24PM +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote: A> On 18/02/2018 15:26, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: A> > My only point is that it is a performance improvement. IMHO that's enough :) A> A> I don't think that passing an invalid argument to a documented KPI is "enough" A> for any optimization. I don't see a sense in making this KPI so sacred. This is something used internally in kernel, and not used outside. The KPI has changed several times in the past. A> > If you can't suggest a more elegant way of doing that improvement, then all A> > I can suggest is to document it and add its support to ZFS. A> A> In return I can only suggest that (1) you run your suggestion by arch@ -- unless A> that's already been done and you can point me to the discussion, (2) document A> it and (3) double-check that all implementations confirm to it. I can provide a patch for ZFS. -- Gleb Smirnoff