Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 23 May 2018 18:18:38 -0700
From:      Eitan Adler <lists@eitanadler.com>
To:        "Jonathan T. Looney" <jtl@freebsd.org>
Cc:        Matthew Macy <mmacy@freebsd.org>, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>,  src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org,  svn-src-head@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: svn commit: r334104 - in head/sys: netinet sys
Message-ID:  <CAF6rxgnP9B-40NPpTLE7KpvR03bcqXJcnCpkditYiAK%2B_besXA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CADrOrmtmSYtMt4vrqdFHrLqAArBaws8bAeynPa8X_sz7ui86uw@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <201805231700.w4NH05hs047395@repo.freebsd.org> <2281830.zrSQodBeDb@ralph.baldwin.cx> <CAPrugNo8_h5jnn2Yt250ZH1crwxHhK46QK1vfdyWssYjuuSAqQ@mail.gmail.com> <CADrOrmtmSYtMt4vrqdFHrLqAArBaws8bAeynPa8X_sz7ui86uw@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 23 May 2018 at 17:40, Jonathan T. Looney <jtl@freebsd.org> wrote:
> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 7:13 PM, Matthew Macy <mmacy@freebsd.org> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 11:52 AM, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote:
>> > On Wednesday, May 23, 2018 05:00:05 PM Matt Macy wrote:
>> >> Author: mmacy
>> >> Date: Wed May 23 17:00:05 2018
>> >> New Revision: 334104
>> >> URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/334104
>> >>
>> >> Log:
>> >>   epoch: allow for conditionally asserting that the epoch context
>> >> fields
>> >>   are unused by zeroing on INVARIANTS builds
>> >
>> > Is M_ZERO really so bad that you need to make it conditional?
>>
>> In this case not at all. It's only exercised by sysctl handlers. I'm
>> mostly responding to an inquiry by jtl. However, gratuitous M_ZERO
>> usage does have a cumulative adverse performance impact.
>
> I appreciate you making this change. And, I do think it is worth avoiding
> M_ZERO where it is unnecessary, for the reason you state.
>
>> > I would probably have preferred something like 'M_ZERO_INVARIANTS'
>> > instead perhaps (or M_ZERO_EPOCH) that only controls M_ZERO and is
>> > still or'd with M_WAITOK or M_NOWAIT.
>>
>> Yes. I like that better too. Thanks.
>
> Yes, that does seem better.

+1 to M_ZERO_INVARIANTS


-- 
Eitan Adler



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAF6rxgnP9B-40NPpTLE7KpvR03bcqXJcnCpkditYiAK%2B_besXA>