From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 21 06:26:26 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FDC71065674; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 06:26:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from avg@freebsd.org) Received: from citadel.icyb.net.ua (citadel.icyb.net.ua [212.40.38.140]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 059F48FC12; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 06:26:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from porto.topspin.kiev.ua (porto-e.starpoint.kiev.ua [212.40.38.100]) by citadel.icyb.net.ua (8.8.8p3/ICyb-2.3exp) with ESMTP id JAA26291; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 09:26:22 +0300 (EEST) (envelope-from avg@freebsd.org) Received: from localhost.topspin.kiev.ua ([127.0.0.1]) by porto.topspin.kiev.ua with esmtp (Exim 4.34 (FreeBSD)) id 1OxwJ4-000Nn6-FI; Tue, 21 Sep 2010 09:26:22 +0300 Message-ID: <4C98500D.5040109@freebsd.org> Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 09:26:21 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD amd64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20100918 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jeff Roberson References: <4C93236B.4050906@freebsd.org> <4C935F56.4030903@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andre Oppermann , Jeff Roberson , Robert Watson , freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: zfs + uma X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 06:26:26 -0000 on 19/09/2010 01:16 Jeff Roberson said the following: > Additionally we could make a last ditch flush mechanism that runs on each cpu in How would you qualify a "last ditch" trigger? Would this be called from "standard" vm_lowmem look or would there be some extra check for even more severe memory condition? > turn and flushes some or all of the buckets in per-cpu caches. Presently that is > not done due to synchronization issues. It can't be done from a central place. > It could be done with a callout mechanism or a for loop that binds to each core > in succession. -- Andriy Gapon