On Mon, Apr 24, 2006 at 08:23:48AM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: > On Sunday 23 April 2006 07:33 am, Marco van Tol wrote:
[...] > > Is there anything you can say regarding an estimate on when per-cpu > > specific stats will hit the official CURRENT and STABLE branches? > > > > Are you interested in what I did to gkrellm so far? All that was necessary > > was a small patch to src/sysdeps/freebsd.c in the gkrellm tree as far as > > making it work with your patch was concerned. I can send the patch to your > > email adres, or make it available on my website. :) > > Well, the goal of the patch was to provide a small performance optimization > by > holding sched_lock for a shorter period of time. Curiously, it actually > resulted in a performance decrease on i386 and amd64 in benchmarks. On a 10 > cpu sparc64 machine it did result in an improvement. I need to do more > research to determine why it would hurt performance for the x86 case (even on > 4 cpu boxes) as I don't want to go committing things that hurt performance. I understand and agree for what that's worth. :) > If I can address the performance problems though this is the interface that > would be presented to userland. OK, I'll keep an eye on this list and /usr/src/UPDATES, assuming it will end up in either if it were added. Meanwhile, I'll see if gkrellm likes my changes sufficiently to commit them to their CVS tree after I got things to work in client/server mode as well. If anything should change for whatever reason it should be fairly trivial to make the necessary changes. Thanks a lot, Marco -- Laat wat je niet laten kunt, en doe wat je niet doen kunt, en word miljonair. _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
