On Fri, 12 Oct 2012, Carl Delsey wrote:
Indeed -- and on non-x86, where there are uncached direct map segments, and
TLB entries that disable caching, reading 2x 32-bit vs 1x 64-bit have quite
different effects in terms of atomicity. Where uncached I/Os are being
used, those differences may
Garrett Wollman wrote:
On Fri, 12 Oct 2012 22:05:54 -0400 (EDT), Rick Macklem
rmack...@uoguelph.ca said:
I've attached the patch drc3.patch (it assumes drc2.patch has
already been
applied) that replaces the single mutex with one for each hash list
for tcp. It also increases the size of
On Oct 13, 2012, at 5:05 AM, Rick Macklem rmack...@uoguelph.ca wrote:
I wrote:
Oops, I didn't get the readahead option description
quite right in the last post. The default read ahead
is 1, which does result in rsize * 2, since there is
the read + 1 readahead.
rsize * 16 would actually
On Oct 8, 2012, at 12:11 , Marcel Moolenaar mar...@xcllnt.net wrote:
On Oct 4, 2012, at 9:42 AM, Garrett Cooper yaneg...@gmail.com wrote:
Both parties (Isilon/Juniper) are converging on the ATF porting work
that Giorgos/myself have done after talking at the FreeBSD Foundation
meet-n-greet.
On Oct 13, 2012, at 12:15 PM, George Neville-Neil g...@neville-neil.com wrote:
I think that's a small price to pay for getting going with the ATF
stuff now rather than in 4 weeks. What's the right way to do this
now with HEAD?
Set WITH_BMAKE=yes in /etc/src.conf or /etc/make.conf and
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 15:15:59 -0400, George Neville-Neil writes:
It could be a while (many weeks) before we get to 4, so the question
really is whether the people working on ATF are willing and able to
build and install FreeBSD using WITH_BMAKE?
=20
I think that's a small price to pay for
On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 1:13 PM, Simon J. Gerraty s...@juniper.net wrote:
On Sat, 13 Oct 2012 15:15:59 -0400, George Neville-Neil writes:
It could be a while (many weeks) before we get to 4, so the question
really is whether the people working on ATF are willing and able to
build and install
7 matches
Mail list logo
