From owner-freebsd-current Wed Mar 7 11:27: 0 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from gratis.grondar.za (grouter.grondar.za [196.7.18.65]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2802037B718 for ; Wed, 7 Mar 2001 11:26:55 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.za) Received: from grondar.za (root@gratis.grondar.za [196.7.18.133]) by gratis.grondar.za (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f27JQbR60731; Wed, 7 Mar 2001 21:26:40 +0200 (SAST) (envelope-from mark@grondar.za) Message-Id: <200103071926.f27JQbR60731@gratis.grondar.za> To: Matt Dillon Cc: current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: harvest_interrupt=YES slows down machine References: <200103071909.f27J9tp71792@earth.backplane.com> In-Reply-To: <200103071909.f27J9tp71792@earth.backplane.com> ; from Matt Dillon "Wed, 07 Mar 2001 11:09:55 PST." Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2001 21:27:31 +0200 From: Mark Murray Sender: owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > 1) Reduce the ring size to something reasonable. 1024 is massive > overkill. 32 would be just fine. I'll play with this. > 2) Add a mandatory tsleep in random_kthread() for EACH entry scanned > from the harvest ring. Something reasonable like 1/10 second (similar > to what you do if the harvest ring is empty. Or may you could pull > off 5 entries at a time and then sleep. Right now you run it in a > tight loop until the ring is completely empty. Hmm. Sounds doable. I'll play. > A 1/10 second sleep and a ring limit of 32 still gives you an effective > 320 seeds per second. Still overkill, but at least not the massive > overkill that its doing now. Event != seed. I'll juggle numbers and see if I can come up with any tweakables (sysctl's) that could give users more control here. Thanks! M -- Mark Murray Warning: this .sig is umop ap!sdn To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message