Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 16 Jan 2007 22:00:54 +0100
From:      "Attilio Rao" <attilio@freebsd.org>
To:        "John Polstra" <jdp@polstra.com>
Cc:        Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@freebsd.org>, Kip Macy <kip.macy@gmail.com>, Suleiman Souhlal <ssouhlal@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: [PATCH] Mantaining turnstile aligned to 128 bytes in i386 CPUs
Message-ID:  <3bbf2fe10701161300jc53b707h408fc0848767511f@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <XFMail.20070116124314.jdp@polstra.com>
References:  <200701161438.52481.jhb@freebsd.org> <XFMail.20070116124314.jdp@polstra.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2007/1/16, John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com>:
> On 16-Jan-2007 John Baldwin wrote:
> > On Tuesday 16 January 2007 11:51, Attilio Rao wrote:
> >> The patch:
> >> http://users.gufi.org/~rookie/works/patches/ts-sq/ts-sq.diff
> >
> > Looks good.  Some minor nits are that in subr_turnstile.c in the comment I
> > would say "a turnstile is allocated" rather than "a turnstile is got from a
> > specific UMA zone" as it reads a little bit clearer.  Also, I would
> > say "Allocate a" rather than "Get a" for the two _alloc() functions.  Also,
> > why not just use UMA_ALIGN_CACHE and make UMA_ALIGN_CACHE (128 - 1) on i386
> > and amd64 rather than adding a new UMA_ALIGN_SYNC?
>
> Also, instead of calling bzero in the _init functions, I think you
> could pass UMA_ZONE_ZINIT to uma_zcreate.

Since it doesn't seem to be documented, it automatically zeros all the
initializations or just the first one?

Attilio


-- 
Peace can only be achieved by understanding - A. Einstein



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3bbf2fe10701161300jc53b707h408fc0848767511f>