From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Jan 15 15:58:12 2015
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 62A65B6E;
 Thu, 15 Jan 2015 15:58:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1444A68E;
 Thu, 15 Jan 2015 15:58:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.84 (FreeBSD))
 (envelope-from <slw@zxy.spb.ru>)
 id 1YBmoE-00034s-4N; Thu, 15 Jan 2015 18:58:10 +0300
Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 18:58:10 +0300
From: Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru>
To: Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] kern/kern_timeout.c rewrite in progress
Message-ID: <20150115155810.GE3698@zxy.spb.ru>
References: <54A92ED1.2070906@selasky.org>
 <CAJ-Vmo=tc-hqykhyc5bQW8qd_34PZU6yfGY8wziByA0xnR3ANQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <54A9A71E.70609@selasky.org>
 <CAAAm0r39Sv3TCvwaCiNQ1Y9iBVtY_nb0A_iNOC41bgxqXmt+4w@mail.gmail.com>
 <54B29A49.3080600@selasky.org>
 <CAAAm0r2eNYicq+KKj5f5EE+KLPxdvy15wj1ZWS=zA6sgOtcoGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <54B67DA7.3070106@selasky.org> <54B7DECF.8070209@selasky.org>
 <20150115154617.GB10325@zxy.spb.ru> <54B7E1E4.6040906@selasky.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <54B7E1E4.6040906@selasky.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: <locally generated>
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Cc: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>,
 FreeBSD Current <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>,
 Jason Wolfe <nitroboost@gmail.com>,
 "freebsd-arch@freebsd.org" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
 <freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-current>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2015 15:58:12 -0000

On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 04:51:00PM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:

> On 01/15/15 16:46, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
> > On Thu, Jan 15, 2015 at 04:37:51PM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> >
> > Only stability impovement?
> > Or performance too?
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Stability improvement mostly. Should not affect performance from what I 
> know. Some changes are made about when and how we can select a different 
> callback CPU for a callout callback. Try reading the updated timeout(9) 

I am not kernel guru and can't be draw a conclusion from manual page.

> man manual page first. Maybe it answers your question. Else feel free to 
> ask here.

As I understand performance for massive TCP connections (tens of
thousands connections) will be same, no improvement, no degraded?
(very high lock congestion on TCP timers working).