On 09/02/2014 11:01, John Baldwin wrote:
> On Saturday, August 30, 2014 1:37:43 pm Peter Wemm wrote:
>> On Saturday 30 August 2014 02:03:42 Steven Hartland wrote:
>> I'm very disappointed in the attention to detail and errors in the commit.  
>> I'm almost at the point where I want to ask for the whole thing to be backed 
>> out.
> I would not be too supportive of that.  This PR has been open for a long, 
> long 
> time with many users using patches from it in production loads that were 
> greatly improved by the changes and clamoring on the lists multiple times to 
> get someone to look at it.  avg@ contributed quite a bit of time to diagnose 
> this with Karl early on, but other developers aside from Steven did not.  It 
> also was not hard to explain to Karl the meaning of 'cache + free' in the bug 
> follow-ups itself (though I believe avg@ had tried this before and it didn't 
> sink in that time for some reason).
>
> I know Steven has since committed a fix, but if there are still concerns, I 
> think it would be best to not just revert this entirely but to spend some 
> time  
> fixing the remaining issues.  Clearly this issue affects a lot of users and 
> the earlier fixes to pagedaemon were not sufficient to fix their issues alone.
>

The patch actually makes two completely orthogonal changes at once, and
one of those changes has no connection to the page daemon.  I suspect
that is why some people have said that their issues were not addressed
by the page daemon fix.

Prior to this patch, we were limiting the ARC size to 3/4 the kmem
map/arena/object size on all architectures, including 64-bit,
uma_small_alloc-enabled architectures where such a limit makes no
sense.  Consequently, some people were complaining, "Why is 1/4 of my
memory going unused?"


_______________________________________________
svn-src-head@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/svn-src-head
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "svn-src-head-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"

Reply via email to