Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 07:45:14 +0100 From: "Poul-Henning Kamp" <phk@phk.freebsd.dk> To: Jeff Roberson <jroberson@chesapeake.net> Cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/sys vnode.h Message-ID: <58263.1109141114@critter.freebsd.dk> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 23 Feb 2005 01:41:01 EST." <20050223014018.Y52537@mail.chesapeake.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
In message <20050223014018.Y52537@mail.chesapeake.net>, Jeff Roberson writes: >On Wed, 23 Feb 2005, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: > >> In message <20050222180223.V52537@mail.chesapeake.net>, Jeff Roberson writes: >> >On Tue, 22 Feb 2005, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote: >> > >> >> phk 2005-02-22 18:49:03 UTC >> >> >> >> FreeBSD src repository >> >> >> >> Modified files: >> >> sys/sys vnode.h >> >> Log: >> >> Group the fields in struct vnode by their function and stick comments >> >> there to tell what the function is. >> > >> >They were sorted according to the lock that they used. I still prefer >> >that, prehaps with sorting by use secondly. >> >> That doesn't make sense. The comment says which lock they use so people >> can still see that, but appearantly people had big trouble seeing what >> fields belonged where. > >It was so that we minimize cache hits, and cause a minimum number of >synchronized writes when we release the mutex. It still doesn't make sense Jeff, they're still mostly ordered by lock if you look carefully. A little shuffling inside the groups will make it even more so. And I want to see benchmarks before you claim any performance degradation because I ram benchmarks and was not even within one tenth of the standard deviation. -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 phk@FreeBSD.ORG | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?58263.1109141114>