svn commit: r243631 - in head/sys: kern sys

[Alfred Perlstein]

On 1/12/13 10:32 PM, Adrian Chadd wrote:
> On 12 January 2013 11:45, Alfred Perlstein <bright at mu.org> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure if regressing to the waterfall method of development is a good
>> idea at this point.
>>
>> I see a light at the end of the tunnel and we to continue to just handle
>> these minor corner cases as we progress.
>>
>> If we move to a model where a minor bug is grounds to completely remove
>> helpful code then nothing will ever get done.
>>
> Allocating 512MB worth of callwheels on a 16GB MIPS machine is a
> little silly, don't you think?
>
> That suggests to me that the extent of which maxfiles/maxusers/etc
> percolates the codebase wasn't totally understood by those who wish to
> change it.
>
> I'd rather see some more investigative work into outlining things that
> need fixing and start fixing those, rather than "just change stuff and
> fix whatever issues creep up."
>
> I kinda hope we all understand what we're working on in the kernel a
> little better than that.

Cool!   I'm glad people are now aware of the callwheel allocation being 
insane with large maxusers.

I saw this about a month ago (if not longer), but since there were half 
a dozen people calling me an imbecile who hadn't really yet read the 
code I didn't want to inflame them more by fixing that with "a hack".  
(actually a simple fix).

A simple fix is to clamp callwheel size to the previous result of a 
maxusers of 384 and call it a day.

However the simplicity of that approach would probably inflame too many 
feelings so I am unsure as how to proceed.

Any ideas?

-Alfred