From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 5 17:22:21 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix, from userid 1033) id 3AA1B16A4CF; Sat, 5 Mar 2005 17:22:21 +0000 (GMT) Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2005 17:22:21 +0000 From: Alexey Dokuchaev To: Scott Long Message-ID: <20050305172221.GA93457@FreeBSD.org> References: <200503050915.j259F30c058488@repoman.freebsd.org> <20050305101211.GA59471@FreeBSD.org> <4229CE8B.20703@samsco.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4229CE8B.20703@samsco.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org cc: David Xu cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/sys proc.h umtx.h src/sys/kernkern_thread.c kern_umtx.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: Sat, 05 Mar 2005 17:22:21 -0000 On Sat, Mar 05, 2005 at 08:21:47AM -0700, Scott Long wrote: > All David's change does is allocate the umtx_q object at thread > creation, it doesn't allocate it on every contested lock operation > like was first suggested. So yes, it likely slows down thread creation > by a small amount, but there is already a lot of other overhead there. > Thread allocation is already optimized by UMA, and it might be possible > to optmize the sub-allocations by putting them under UMA too. Ah, well. Thanks for explanation. ./danfe