From owner-svn-src-all@freebsd.org Fri Aug 26 22:02:57 2016 Return-Path: Delivered-To: svn-src-all@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6979B76D68; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 22:02:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) 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 A5D712E2; Fri, 26 Aug 2016 22:02:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.86 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1bdPDD-000HRb-M8; Sat, 27 Aug 2016 01:02:55 +0300 Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2016 01:02:55 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: Adrian Chadd Cc: Bruce Simpson , Ryan Stone , "svn-src-head@freebsd.org" , Ryan Stone , "src-committers@freebsd.org" , "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: svn commit: r304436 - in head: . sys/netinet Message-ID: <20160826220255.GI88122@zxy.spb.ru> References: <0acba141-4701-d9c2-0ddb-46d1f60ff55b@fastmail.net> <20160820220510.GX8192@zxy.spb.ru> <8ac23bd1-dcb3-7c64-f195-5039f9af0eaf@fastmail.net> <20160821000400.GY8192@zxy.spb.ru> <20160826144926.GE88122@zxy.spb.ru> <3dba1b70-54cc-0bb1-5cc8-8c56cd750bec@fastmail.net> <20160826151324.GF88122@zxy.spb.ru> <20160826213613.GH88122@zxy.spb.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false X-BeenThere: svn-src-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22 Precedence: list List-Id: "SVN commit messages for the entire src tree \(except for " user" and " projects" \)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 22:02:58 -0000 On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 02:42:27PM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 26 August 2016 at 14:36, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 02:32:00PM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote: > > > >> Hi, > >> > >> It's pcb lock contention. > > > > Not sure: only 5% of all time. > > And same 5% for tcbhashsize = 65K and 256K. > > Or you talk about some more thin effect? > > You're in the inpcb lock from multiple places. For tcp case I am found only 3 places: in_pcbdrop in_pcbremlists in_pcblookup_hash > the tcbhashsize doesnt influence the pcb lock contention - it just > affects how long you take doing lookups. iF your hash table is too > small then you end up doing lots of O(n) walks of a hash bucket to > find a pcb entry. :) Hmm. I am not clearly understund you. How originate pcb lock contention? How I can see this (in pmc profile, in dtarce probese)?