Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2018 12:33:58 -0800 From: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org> To: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Andrew Reilly <areilly@bigpond.net.au>, kib@FreeBSD.org, current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Since last week (today) current on my Ryzen box is unstable Message-ID: <20180218203358.GG93303@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <359681a7-3885-820e-1ac8-19254c83d1ad@FreeBSD.org> References: <0CEA9D55-D488-42EC-BBDE-D0B7CE58BAEA@bigpond.net.au> <cc3ae685-5f0e-d968-7b08-60a4836093e1@FreeBSD.org> <20180218023545.GE93303@FreeBSD.org> <431f3e00-c66a-8e2e-6c61-a315a6353d1d@FreeBSD.org> <20180218132623.GF93303@FreeBSD.org> <359681a7-3885-820e-1ac8-19254c83d1ad@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Feb 18, 2018 at 10:15:24PM +0200, Andriy Gapon wrote: A> On 18/02/2018 15:26, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: A> > My only point is that it is a performance improvement. IMHO that's enough :) A> A> I don't think that passing an invalid argument to a documented KPI is "enough" A> for any optimization. I don't see a sense in making this KPI so sacred. This is something used internally in kernel, and not used outside. The KPI has changed several times in the past. A> > If you can't suggest a more elegant way of doing that improvement, then all A> > I can suggest is to document it and add its support to ZFS. A> A> In return I can only suggest that (1) you run your suggestion by arch@ -- unless A> that's already been done and you can point me to the discussion, (2) document A> it and (3) double-check that all implementations confirm to it. I can provide a patch for ZFS. -- Gleb Smirnoff
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20180218203358.GG93303>