From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org  Thu Mar  9 19:09:27 2017
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@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 18FD0D0529E
 for <freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Thu,  9 Mar 2017 19:09:27 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from citrin+bsd@citrin.ru)
Received: from hz.citrin.ru (hz.citrin.ru [88.198.212.3])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D24821EC9
 for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu,  9 Mar 2017 19:09:26 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from citrin+bsd@citrin.ru)
Received: from x220.lan (c-24-60-168-172.hsd1.ct.comcast.net [24.60.168.172])
 by hz.citrin.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1B54C29A342
 for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu,  9 Mar 2017 19:09:21 +0000 (UTC)
Subject: Re: about that DFBSD performance test
To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
References: <b91a6e40-9956-1ad9-ac59-41a281846147@norma.perm.ru>
 <CAK7dMtDiT-PKyy5LkT1WEg5g-nwqv501F=Ap4dNCdwzwr_1dqA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20170308125710.GS15630@zxy.spb.ru> <20170308150346.GA32269@dft-labs.eu>
From: Anton Yuzhaninov <citrin+bsd@citrin.ru>
Message-ID: <7d02f9f3-8dd3-9dc9-56d6-be9a34b49750@citrin.ru>
Date: Thu, 9 Mar 2017 14:09:19 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/45.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20170308150346.GA32269@dft-labs.eu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=citrin.ru; s=s0;
 t=1489086562; bh=dekxih+jLNednRWdyqdIqsqZssfL293yH6OMV2x3oPw=;
 h=Subject:To:References:From:Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding;
 b=kvVg9SxSTewDa7DmYzrHGqDkMRS/Jj6t2Ly/e5/H7IOSnFwNLZM+vjCtOVZSNFc53aEJLGj/XbV9VcgJ+HTvW5C4wPHK0cHyspcVM005IAURspfBqgjQ7nDzhgSWvsaYM3PUnGR5GKNGX4wbkWj/DbTrZ/aJWBen6D3UmI9JRtM=
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-net>,
 <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
 <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2017 19:09:27 -0000

On 03/08/17 10:03, Mateusz Guzik wrote:
> First and foremost there is general kernel scalability. Certain counters
> and most locks are purely managed with atomic operations. An atomic
> operation grabs the entire cacheline with the particular variable (64
> bytes in total) in exclusive mode.

Isn't problem of atomic counters was solved by counter(9) framework?