svn commit: r277213 - in head: share/man/man9 sys/kern sys/ofed/include/linux sys/sys

[Randall Stewart]

Hans

Thats great, could you please open a project branch that
we can look at it in too?

I would very much appreciate that. Sometimes I like to look
at the whole code with it all in place (not just patches) and a project
branch really helps with that.

R
> On Jan 22, 2015, at 3:39 AM, Hans Petter Selasky <hps at selasky.org> wrote:
> 
> On 01/22/15 09:10, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
>> On Thu, Jan 22, 2015 at 08:14:26AM +0100, Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
>>> On 01/22/15 06:26, Warner Losh wrote:
>>>  >
>>>>> The code simply needs an update. It is not broken in any ways - right? If it is not broken, fixing it is not that urgent.
>>>> 
>>>> Radically changing the performance characteristics is breaking the code. Performance regression in the TCP stack is urgent to fix.
>> 
>>> Not being able to enumerate what all the consumers are that use this and
>>> provide an analysis about why they aren?t important to fix is a bug in
>>> your process, and in your interaction with the project. We simply do not
>>> operate that way.
>> Right, I completely agree with this statement.
>> 
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> My plan is to work out a patch for the TCP stack today, which only
>>> change the callout_init() call or its function. This should not need any
>>> particular review. I'll let adrian test and review, because I think he
>>> is closer to me timezone wise and you're standing on my head saying its
>>> urgent. If he is still not happy, I can back my change out. Else it
>>> remains in -current AS-IS.
>> TCP regresssion was noted, so it is brought in front.  There is nothing
>> else which makes TCP issue different from other (hidden) issues.
>> 
>> ===========================
>>> MFC to 10-stable I can delay for sure until
>>> all issues you report to me are fixed.
>> ===========================
>> 
>> Sigh, you still do not understand.  It is your duty to identify all pieces
>> which break after your change.  After that, we can argue whether each of
>> them is critical or not to allow the migration. But this must have been
>> done before the KPI change hit the tree.
>> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Are you saying that pieces of code that runs completely unlocked using "volatile" as only synchronization mechanism is better than what I would call a temporary and hopefully short TCP stack performance loss?
> 
> I don't understand? How frequently do you reboot your boxes? Maybe one every day? And you don't care?
> 
> --HPS
> 
> 
> 

------------------------------
Randall Stewart
803-317-4952 (cell)