From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 12 08:21:39 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C03A116A4D0 for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 08:21:39 +0000 (GMT) Received: from c00l3r.networx.ch (c00l3r.networx.ch [62.48.2.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE77943D4C for ; Thu, 12 Aug 2004 08:21:38 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from andre@freebsd.org) Received: (qmail 97193 invoked from network); 12 Aug 2004 08:15:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO freebsd.org) ([62.48.0.53]) (envelope-sender ) by c00l3r.networx.ch (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 12 Aug 2004 08:15:28 -0000 Message-ID: <411B2892.B39C83E0@freebsd.org> Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 10:21:38 +0200 From: Andre Oppermann X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.8 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeff Roberson References: <200408120756.i7C7uXOQ011743@repoman.freebsd.org> <20040812035656.S7322@mail.chesapeake.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: Jeff Roberson cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern sched_ule.c X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 08:21:40 -0000 Jeff Roberson wrote: > > On Thu, 12 Aug 2004, Jeff Roberson wrote: > > > jeff 2004-08-12 07:56:33 UTC > > > > FreeBSD src repository > > > > Modified files: > > sys/kern sched_ule.c > > Log: > > - Introduce a new flag KEF_HOLD that prevents sched_add() from doing a > > migration. Use this in sched_prio() and sched_switch() to stop us from > > migrating threads that are in short term sleeps or are runnable. These > > extra migrations were added in the patches to support KSE. > > This patch brings my 'super-smack' performance in ULE above that of 4BSD. > worldstone seems unaffected. I would be interested in hearing about what > other performance changes there are as a result of this patch. I would > also be interested in hearing about cases where ULE is slower than 4BSD. See -current list of yesterday. Martin Blapp was reporting problems with some 500 sendmail/milter etc. processes where it get slower and slower compared to 4BSD. -- Andre