From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 14 23:08:48 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99F3216A4CE for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 23:08:48 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtp006.bizmail.sc5.yahoo.com (smtp006.bizmail.sc5.yahoo.com [66.163.175.83]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 623DC43D5D for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 23:08:48 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from noackjr@alumni.rice.edu) Received: from unknown (HELO optimator.noacks.org) (noackjr@supercrime.org@70.240.198.174 with login) by smtp006.bizmail.sc5.yahoo.com with SMTP; 14 Dec 2004 23:08:48 -0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimator.noacks.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DAC6616B; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:08:47 -0600 (CST) Received: from optimator.noacks.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (optimator.noacks.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 87618-13; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:08:44 -0600 (CST) Received: from www.noacks.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by optimator.noacks.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE58360FD; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:08:43 -0600 (CST) Received: from 192.168.1.9 (SquirrelMail authenticated user noackjr); by www.noacks.org with HTTP; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:08:43 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <3308.192.168.1.9.1103065723.squirrel@192.168.1.9> In-Reply-To: <20041214222444.GA9668@flash.atmos.colostate.edu> References: <20041214222444.GA9668@flash.atmos.colostate.edu> Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 17:08:43 -0600 (CST) From: "Jon Noack" To: "Tony Arcieri" User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.3a X-Mailer: SquirrelMail/1.4.3a MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at noacks.org cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern sched_ule.c (fwd) X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: noackjr@alumni.rice.edu List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 23:08:48 -0000 Tony Arcieri wrote: > On 2004-12-13 17:26:10 Scott Long wrote: >> RELENG_5 is the stable branch. If quality testing goes into ULE in HEAD >> and it's shown to be as stable as 4BSD then we can consider it for >> RELENG_5 in the future. Given the incredible problems that we had in >> the scheduler leading up to 5.3, I'm not excited about quickly merging >> these things. > > I have FreeBSD 5.3 installed on a dual amd64 colo server of mine and have > been experiencing severe issues with the system and the 4BSD scheduler > under heavy MySQL load. Originally with 5.3-RELEASE these appeared to be > kernel crashes/deadlocks, but unfortunately I never had a dump device > configured when I was running 5.3-RELEASE and so I don't have a core file > to be examined. > > However, I've been checking out the sys/ sources from RELENG_5 fairly > frequently and still experience severe issues with the 4BSD scheduler > when the system is under heavy database load. Namely, while the kernel > appears to remain running and the system continues to respond to pings, > all other network services cease to function. New TCP connections are > accepted, but the services don't respond, and existing connections time > out. > > I have found this does NOT occur when the ULE scheduler is used. I have > (perhaps foolishly) attempted to copy the minimum necessary files to run > the ULE scheduler from the -CURRENT branch and merge them myself into the > 5-STABLE sources, which I believe are sched_ule.c and kern_switch.c, and > have modified the proc_fini() function in kern_proc.c to panic if invoked > (since according to the comments, UMA should ensure that proc_fini is > never called, correct?). If these are all the changes that are needed to > import the ULE scheduler, then why continue to include the broken ULE > scheduler with an #error tag rather than importing the minimum sources > required for the ULE scheduler to work and leave it off per default? > > I, for one, am experiencing better system stability with ULE than with > 4BSD. > If anyone cares to examine my system I can provide shell access. I thought about trying this last night when I saw that ULE was resurrected. Make sure you also grab kern_sig.c: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-src/2004-December/036757.html I can't say whether those 3 files are all you need, just that I would also include kern_sig.c... ;-) Jon