Subject: Re: diffs for UVM/UBC improvements available
To: Chuck Silvers <>
From: Bill Sommerfeld <>
List: tech-kern
Date: 05/22/2001 15:40:20
> I can't disagree with this, but I don't think it's really that much harder
> to look at now.  I just read through the whole diff last night to write up
> the summary, and it wasn't hard to tell which aspect different parts
> were for.

I find it much easier to go through and verify that (for instance) all
the VOP_ISLOCKED changes were done correctly in one pass if you don't
have to wade through other changes while doing so.

> > >    (I also got rid of v_lease on the principle that it's an optimization for
> > >    an almost-unused feature.)
> > 
> > Why?  I actually use this stuff.  How much slower is NQNFS under heavy
> > use since making this change?  This strikes me as "going a step too
> > far".
> I have no idea what the performance effect of this is.
> what test would you be interested in, specifically?

I'd realy prefer to see this part of the change backed out as
completely unrelated to the UBC/UVM tweaks.  How much performance gain
do you get *specifically* from nuking v_lease?

					- Bill