Date: Mon, 20 Sep 2010 21:31:55 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> To: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@jroberson.net> Cc: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>, Jeff Roberson <jeff@freebsd.org>, Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: zfs + uma Message-ID: <4C97A89B.9070806@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1009182225050.23448@desktop> References: <4C93236B.4050906@freebsd.org> <4C935F56.4030903@freebsd.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1009181221560.86826@fledge.watson.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1009181135430.23448@desktop> <4C95C804.1010701@freebsd.org> <alpine.BSF.2.00.1009182225050.23448@desktop>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
on 19/09/2010 11:27 Jeff Roberson said the following: > On Sun, 19 Sep 2010, Andriy Gapon wrote: > >> on 19/09/2010 01:16 Jeff Roberson said the following: >>> Additionally we could make a last ditch flush mechanism that runs on each cpu in >>> turn and flushes some or all of the buckets in per-cpu caches. Presently that is >>> not done due to synchronization issues. It can't be done from a central place. >>> It could be done with a callout mechanism or a for loop that binds to each core >>> in succession. >> >> I like all of the tree above approaches. >> The last one is a bit hard to implement, the first two seem easier. > > All the last one requires is a loop calling sched_bind() on each available cpu. Something like cache_drain() but with sched_bind() in the loop? critical_enter() would be probably also needed to avoid preemption and conflict while acting on cache buckets? -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4C97A89B.9070806>