Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2013 08:14:42 -0700 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: Alexander Motin <mav@freebsd.org> Cc: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: b_freelist TAILQ/SLIST Message-ID: <CAJ-VmonKubEaU1RQ=D49SEj%2BmusP7d0vOVHy%2BiU_aXtc0Zowuw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <51CD4FEA.7030605@FreeBSD.org> References: <51CCAE14.6040504@FreeBSD.org> <20130628065732.GL91021@kib.kiev.ua> <51CD4FEA.7030605@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
.. i'd rather you narrow down _why_ it's performing better before committing it. Otherwise it may just creep up again after someone does another change in an unrelated part of the kernel. You're using instructions-retired; how about using l1/l2 cache loads, stores, etc? There's a lot more CPU counters available. You have a very cool problem to solve. If I could reproduce it locally I'd give you a hand. Thanks, -adrian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-VmonKubEaU1RQ=D49SEj%2BmusP7d0vOVHy%2BiU_aXtc0Zowuw>