From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Aug 17 17:12:54 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 888E6106566B for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 17:12:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org) Received: from qmta04.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net (qmta04.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net [76.96.30.40]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 634808FC08 for ; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 17:12:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from omta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.11]) by qmta04.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id nt0a1j0020EPchoA4tBo73; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 17:11:48 +0000 Received: from damnhippie.dyndns.org ([24.8.232.202]) by omta01.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id ntBn1j00S4NgCEG8MtBotC; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 17:11:48 +0000 Received: from [172.22.42.240] (revolution.hippie.lan [172.22.42.240]) by damnhippie.dyndns.org (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q7HHBktI018236; Fri, 17 Aug 2012 11:11:46 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from freebsd@damnhippie.dyndns.org) From: Ian Lepore To: Adrian Chadd In-Reply-To: References: <157941699.20120815004542@serebryakov.spb.ru> <502AE8B5.9090106@FreeBSD.org> <502B775D.7000101@FreeBSD.org> <1849591745.20120815144006@serebryakov.spb.ru> <1345139226.27688.48.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> <174138639.20120817143840@serebryakov.spb.ru> <1345215393.27688.85.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 11:11:46 -0600 Message-ID: <1345223506.27688.116.camel@revolution.hippie.lan> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.32.1 FreeBSD GNOME Team Port Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: CURRENT as gateway on not-so-fast hardware: where is a bottlneck? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2012 17:12:54 -0000 On Fri, 2012-08-17 at 09:58 -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 17 August 2012 07:56, Ian Lepore wrote: > > > That result actually matches my expectation... it fixed only a part of > > your problem. I suspected (without very good evidence) that you may > > have two unrelated problems; hopefully now that we've eliminated one the > > other will be easier to find. > > > > I've submitted a PR with that patch attached, since it has now been > > shown to fix a problem on two different sets of (similar) hardware: > > > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=170705 > > Hm, who's a good person to review this stuff? Maybe bde? > No! Not bde! He'll notice that I violated style(9) by accidentally leaving an extra blank line between a comment block and the function definition. :) (There are probably more violations than that -- I did this when I was first trying to come to grips with the differences between style(9) and the almost-style(9) standards we use at work.) When I first proposed the changes, jhb remarked that they sounded good, but as far as I know, nobody reviewed the actual diff when I posted it. It looks like bde and phk were the primary maintainers back when this code was being more actively worked on. -- Ian