Date: Sun, 18 Feb 2018 22:15:24 +0200 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@FreeBSD.org> To: Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@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: <359681a7-3885-820e-1ac8-19254c83d1ad@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20180218132623.GF93303@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>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 18/02/2018 15:26, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > My only point is that it is a performance improvement. IMHO that's enough :) I don't think that passing an invalid argument to a documented KPI is "enough" for any optimization. > If you can't suggest a more elegant way of doing that improvement, then all > I can suggest is to document it and add its support to ZFS. In return I can only suggest that (1) you run your suggestion by arch@ -- unless that's already been done and you can point me to the discussion, (2) document it and (3) double-check that all implementations confirm to it. -- Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?359681a7-3885-820e-1ac8-19254c83d1ad>