Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2007 16:32:03 +0900 From: Norikatsu Shigemura <nork@FreeBSD.org> To: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net> Cc: Norikatsu Shigemura <nork@FreeBSD.org>, current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: ULE 2.0 Message-ID: <20070106163203.5bad1a4e.nork@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20070105001814.N552@10.0.0.1> References: <20070104005625.D1508@10.0.0.1> <20070105000500.d005ca0b.nork@FreeBSD.org> <20070104170932.C552@10.0.0.1> <2329.211.18.249.19.1167981583.squirrel@mail.ninth-nine.com> <20070105001814.N552@10.0.0.1>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 5 Jan 2007 00:18:43 -0800 (PST)
Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 5 Jan 2007, Norikatsu Shigemura wrote:
> >> One oops in my last patch. Try this one.
> > I got following message.
> Thank you.
> I assume it booted ok after this? I will commit something soon to address
> it. I want to test it more heavily first.
Thank you. I got following message. Sorry I don't use latest your
sched_ule.c. If this issue was fixed, please wait a minute. I'm
compiling latest current kernel.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Timecounters tick every 1.000 msec
Fast IPsec: Initialized Security Association Processing.
(noperiph:sym0:0:-1:-1): SCSI BUS reset delivered.
(noperiph:sym1:0:-1:-1): SCSI BUS reset delivered.
sched_priority: invalid priority 225nice 0, ticks 46194 ftick 0 ltick 45 tick pri 45
ad0: 78533MB <HDS728080PLAT20 PF2OA21B> at ata0-master UDMA100
firewire0: bus manager 2
ad1: 238475MB <I-O DATA NAKA-HDRM 2.10.8> at ata1-master UDMA100
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I got 'invalid interactive priority' KASSERTion. Sorry I didn't
take a note. If I reproduce it, I'll report to you.
MY IMPRESSION:
I don't know that ULE2.0 is faster than 4BSD. But I feel feathery.
Because, on make extract in big tarball, I can use my desktop
comfortably than 4BSD. And I can see .avi with a little stop:-)
I'll continue to test ULE2.0.
P.S.
I think that 'invalid priority' message is ugly:-). Please change
like following patch. This is cosmetic change.
Index: sched_ule.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /home/ncvs/src/sys/kern/sched_ule.c,v
retrieving revision 1.176
diff -u -r1.176 sched_ule.c
--- sched_ule.c 6 Jan 2007 02:34:23 -0000 1.176
+++ sched_ule.c 6 Jan 2007 07:12:24 -0000
@@ -1057,9 +1057,9 @@
if (!(pri >= PRI_MIN_TIMESHARE && pri <= PRI_MAX_TIMESHARE)) {
static int once = 1;
if (once) {
- printf("sched_priority: invalid priority %d",
+ printf("sched_priority: invalid priority %d\n",
pri);
- printf("nice %d, ticks %d ftick %d ltick %d tick pri %d\n",
+ printf("nice %d, ticks %d, ftick %d, ltick %d, tick pri %d\n",
td->td_proc->p_nice,
td->td_sched->ts_ticks,
td->td_sched->ts_ftick,
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070106163203.5bad1a4e.nork>