Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 20:24:26 +0800 From: Zhao Shuai <zhaoshuai@freebsd.org> To: Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl>, soc-status <soc-status@freebsd.org>, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: FIFO Optimization - final summary Message-ID: <8126ef5c0908230524g177f29d2qe836ad66c0c3f016@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20090822130445.GM1292@hoeg.nl> References: <8126ef5c0908220125u42463afbm3303413015c05107@mail.gmail.com> <20090822130445.GM1292@hoeg.nl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
2009/8/22 Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl> > Hi, > > * Zhao Shuai <zhaoshuai@freebsd.org> wrote: > > Hi All, > > > > This summer I worked on rewriting the FIFO(named pipe) subsystem. > > The new FIFO system uses pipe implementation while previously > > it is implemented as socket. > > > > The new FIFO code passes the official regression test and the following > > bugs has been eliminated: PR 76525,PR 94772,PR 76144,PR 116770. > > According to my performance test, the new FIFO system increases the > > throughput by 30% comparing with the old one. > > > > I will continue to improve my code after GSoC and hope it can be merged > > with the main tree. > > I'm too lazy to read the source, check out sources, etc. but the pipe > and fifo code has now been merged, right? Just out of curiosity, how do these changes affect the kernel binary size? How many lines of code have been added/removed? The original pipe code is moved into sys/kern/subr_pipe.c where we deal with pipe internals. Most of the pipe code is kept untouched except some changes to several function prototype. /sys/kern/sys_pipe.c is now just a wrapper of pipe routines. The affect on the kernel binary size is negligible. -- Regards, Zhao
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8126ef5c0908230524g177f29d2qe836ad66c0c3f016>