From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Nov 30 09:07:49 2007
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDEF816A46B;
	Fri, 30 Nov 2007 09:07:49 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from lol@chistydom.ru)
Received: from hermes.hw.ru (hermes.hw.ru [80.68.240.91])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3AFD13C474;
	Fri, 30 Nov 2007 09:07:48 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from lol@chistydom.ru)
Received: from [80.68.244.40] (account a_popov@rbc.ru [80.68.244.40] verified)
	by hermes.hw.ru (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.0.14)
	with ESMTPA id 204291261; Fri, 30 Nov 2007 12:07:25 +0300
Message-ID: <474FD2BF.606@chistydom.ru>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 12:07:11 +0300
From: Alexey Popov <lol@chistydom.ru>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20070924)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Kris Kennaway <kris@FreeBSD.org>
References: <4741905E.8050300@chistydom.ru>	<fhs3s5$knj$1@ger.gmane.org>	<47419AB3.5030008@chistydom.ru>	<fhs7hp$2es$2@ger.gmane.org>
	<4741A7DA.2050706@chistydom.ru> <4741DA15.9000308@FreeBSD.org>
	<47429DB8.7040504@chistydom.ru> <4742ADFE.40902@FreeBSD.org>
	<4742C46A.1060701@chistydom.ru> <47432F77.3030606@FreeBSD.org>
	<474339E9.4080301@FreeBSD.org> <4743629B.9090408@FreeBSD.org>
	<47456B71.5040205@chistydom.ru> <4745E5B3.6060200@FreeBSD.org>
	<47468165.5010906@chistydom.ru> <4746B21F.7050906@FreeBSD.org>
	<4746BD92.6000204@chistydom.ru> <474F12AE.7050808@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <474F12AE.7050808@FreeBSD.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: 2 x quad-core system is slower that 2 x dual core on FreeBSD
X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code <freebsd-stable.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-stable>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable>,
	<mailto:freebsd-stable-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 09:07:50 -0000

Hi

Kris Kennaway wrote:
> One more patch which may or may not help is:
> 
>   http://www.freebsd.org/~jhb/patches/namei_rwlock.patch
> 
> (may also require porting since it was against an older version of 
> 7.0-CURRENT).  When I have tested this in the past it was a performance 
> loss for reasons that I think I understand (basically, it is locally a 
> performance improvement for the name cache but also requires a fixed 
> lockmgr to avoid an overall performance loss), but I don't remember if I 
> tested it in conjunction with the lockmgr patch.
This patch doesn't apply to 7-STABLE because /sys/kern/vfs_cache.c was 
changed significanly since rev. 1.108. I tried to patch it manually but 
don't know what to do with cache_lookup() changes.

>>> There are patches you need to enable it on woodcrest.  They are in my 
>>> p4 branch (kris-contention) but I don't have time right now to 
>>> extract them.
>> I think it would be very useful because I can't see any other ways to 
>> profile FreeBSD on the modern many-cores machines.
> 
> You can extract the changeset from my branch via 
> http://perforce.freebsd.org.  Unfortunately I don't have time to do it 
> myself.
I'll try it if it does not also need porting.

With best regards,
Alexey Popov