On Tue, Aug 16, 2016 at 06:21:14AM -0700, Randall Stewart via svn-src-all wrote:
> > In theory it *could* be MFC’d to stable-10 and 11 but I am not sure we want > to do that. I am > told by Drew that it does improve performance since in stable-10 you are > getting the INFO_WLOCK() > but I am not sure if folks want it MFC’d… > > One thing that this code leads us towards is we *in theory* could move the > lock acquisition to the > timer code itself (I think).. we would have to make sure that the callout > functions did do the > unlock since thats part of the lock-dance with reference… but its > theoretically possible :-) What reason to not MFC? I mean MFCed all don't break API/ABI. _______________________________________________ svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
