Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2017 12:12:14 -0600 From: Eric van Gyzen <vangyzen@FreeBSD.org> To: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org>, Bruce Evans <brde@optusnet.com.au> Cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-all@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-stable@FreeBSD.org, svn-src-stable-10@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r312666 - stable/10/sys/kern Message-ID: <d0970738-8eb7-8a81-453f-199f11fd2e39@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <49838a2b-c628-da8c-4c9c-4a66c83119f8@FreeBSD.org> References: <201701230834.v0N8Ypnu011042@repo.freebsd.org> <20170124002712.Q903@besplex.bde.org> <49838a2b-c628-da8c-4c9c-4a66c83119f8@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 01/23/2017 10:03, Andriy Gapon wrote: > On 23/01/2017 15:34, Bruce Evans wrote: >> What is a good benchmark for showing that the fix helps? > > Honestly, I do not know. We ran into a pathology where a thread was not getting > scheduled for a long time after being preempted while in a critical section (so > the actual preemption was a voluntary switch when exiting the critical section). > I am not sure what kind of a synthetic benchmark or a test case would readily > demonstrate the problem. I submitted r270423, which introduced the bug Andriy just fixed. I'm already setting up the performance test that I used for that change. It's a macro-benchmark of a commercial product, so I can't elaborate on details, but at least I can give a thumb indication in the style of a Roman Dictator. Eric
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?d0970738-8eb7-8a81-453f-199f11fd2e39>