PERFORCE change 154309 for review (etc.)

[Marko Zec]

On Tuesday 09 December 2008 20:48:58 Julian Elischer wrote:
> Marko,
>
> I'm following along using p4 and the diff script. It looks good..

The code in vimage-commit2 passed through a make universe run, though a 
new panic just emerged in head related to kmacy's changes to routing 
tbale locking.  I feel somewhat reluctant to dump commit2 to svn while 
there's an unrelated but known panic that doesn't allow the system to 
boot, and furthermore bz and I wanted to double-check that all sysctls 
would still work exactly the same way before and after the change - a 
few days ago I noticed something strange but want to check it with the 
most recent head...

> If it all seems to be working we should commit what you have
> and then we should get Kris and Robert to try some of their
> benchmarks.. to confirm the numbers you saw earlier.

Yes it would be extremely usefull to have people doing unbiased tests of 
all kinds, though I think that the right time to commence testing would 
be in a week or two from now when we'll have all three different 
variable layout and referencing models in place in head, selectable as 
compile time option, as outlined at the bottom of bz's wiki page:

http://wiki.freebsd.org/Image/KernelOptions

Marko


> Kris, the change that is upcoming for the next vimage commit
> gathers the various networking globals in the system and
> aggregates them together into several functional structures.
>
> e.g. one for inet related vars and another for interface and basic
> networking infrastructure related vars.
>
> The thing we would like "independent" corroboration of is that
> the change to having these gathered together, and initialized by
> an explicit initialization routing does not give any significant
> performance difference for a representative set of networking
> tests.
>
> Kris and Robert, what tests would you suggest and is there a chance
> that we can get some "independent" testing done on this?