On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 11:24 AM, Ryota Ozaki <ozak...@netbsd.org> wrote: > First I'm not against restructuring, though I hoped minimum > restructuring on non-performance-sensitive paths.
My understanding is that, non-performance-sensitive paths (e.g. ioctl()'s) also touches performance-sensitive data structures (e.g. ifnet list), that is the problem. Non-performance-sensitive paths have to be more careful to not disturb performance-sensitive data structures and paths. For ioctl()'s, they have to allocate kernel-wired memory to not sleep (via copyout()) while iterating performance-critical ifnet list. Thus I don't think you can avoid restructuring those codes. (I'd want to also encourage you to *not* become too nervous about changing those codes. Let's progress bravely and rely on high-quality NetBSD "end" users for testing. :) > BTW, do you think we eventually introduce "all packet processing in > a LWP context"-like restructuring? I'm inclined to run Layer2 and bpf > in softint. If we also end up doing so, I want to do it early. > Of course, we have to address performance issues somehow at some point > though. > > Thanks, > ozaki-r > >> >> Dave >> >> -- >> David Young >> dyo...@pobox.com Urbana, IL (217) 721-9981
