Harti Brandt | 2 Nov 10:23 2004
Picon

Remote stuff in make


Hi all,

I want to remove the remote stuff from our make to make maintenance 
easier. Remote make has been disfunctional from the original import on - 
the necessary files have never been imported. The base system doesn't use 
that feature (and has no need to), ports have their own remote built stuff 
AFIK. If actually someone would need this - there is the pmake port that 
really contains this stuff.

If anybody has a good reason why we need to keep this (and the associated 
patches to make it work + the willingness to support it in the future) - 
please speak up now.

Attached is a diff that just removes the #defines and #ifdefs. The MD5 of 
the produced make is the same as before.

harti

Index: job.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /local/cvs/freebsd/src/usr.bin/make/job.c,v
retrieving revision 1.52
diff -u -r1.52 job.c
--- job.c	23 Oct 2004 21:36:55 -0000	1.52
+++ job.c	2 Nov 2004 09:19:51 -0000
 <at>  <at>  -123,12 +123,8  <at>  <at> 
  #include "dir.h"
  #include "job.h"
  #include "pathnames.h"
(Continue reading)

Bob Bishop | 2 Nov 10:49 2004
Picon

Re: Remote stuff in make

Hi,

At 09:23 02/11/2004, Harti Brandt wrote:

>Hi all,
>
>I want to remove the remote stuff from our make to make maintenance 
>easier. Remote make has been disfunctional from the original import on - 
>the necessary files have never been imported. The base system doesn't use 
>that feature (and has no need to), ports have their own remote built stuff 
>AFIK. If actually someone would need this - there is the pmake port that 
>really contains this stuff.
>
>If anybody has a good reason why we need to keep this (and the associated 
>patches to make it work + the willingness to support it in the future) - 
>please speak up now.

For my money, kill it and don't think twice. However, there's a lot of 
related nonsense like .NOTPARALLEL and silent manipulation of the -B option 
which ought to be tidied up too.

>Attached is a diff that just removes the #defines and #ifdefs. The MD5 of 
>the produced make is the same as before.
>
>harti
>
>
>Index: job.c
>===================================================================
>RCS file: /local/cvs/freebsd/src/usr.bin/make/job.c,v
(Continue reading)

Poul-Henning Kamp | 4 Nov 09:44 2004
Picon

HEADSUP: HZ=1000 by default on i386


We increasingly need better granularity in our sleep/wakeup calls and
things like device polling and trafic shaping needs higher granularity
in particular.

So pending any really good arguments to the contrary I plan to increase
HZ to 1000 on i386 this weekend.

You can still define any HZ value you like in your kernel config file
or even set it from the loader.

--

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk <at> FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch <at> freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe <at> freebsd.org"

Luigi Rizzo | 4 Nov 09:48 2004

Re: HEADSUP: HZ=1000 by default on i386

On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 09:44:45AM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> 
> We increasingly need better granularity in our sleep/wakeup calls and
> things like device polling and trafic shaping needs higher granularity
> in particular.

are you trying to put the blame on me ?  :)

cheers
luigi

> So pending any really good arguments to the contrary I plan to increase
> HZ to 1000 on i386 this weekend.
> 
> You can still define any HZ value you like in your kernel config file
> or even set it from the loader.
> 
> -- 
> Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
> phk <at> FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
> FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-arch <at> freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe <at> freebsd.org"
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch <at> freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe <at> freebsd.org"
(Continue reading)

Poul-Henning Kamp | 4 Nov 09:50 2004
Picon

Re: HEADSUP: HZ=1000 by default on i386

In message <20041104004811.A57935 <at> xorpc.icir.org>, Luigi Rizzo writes:
>On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 09:44:45AM +0100, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
>> 
>> We increasingly need better granularity in our sleep/wakeup calls and
>> things like device polling and trafic shaping needs higher granularity
>> in particular.
>
>are you trying to put the blame on me ?  :)

No, but I can do it if you want me to :-)

Seriously, this is just long overdue, we've been talking about it
since the 4.x branch.

--

-- 
Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
phk <at> FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe    
Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch <at> freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe <at> freebsd.org"

Alain Dazzi | 3 Nov 20:00 2004

VIA c3 support

Does FreeBSD 5.3 support the VIA C3 processor?

Thanks!

-Alain

_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch <at> freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe <at> freebsd.org"

Robert Watson | 4 Nov 15:05 2004
Picon

Re: HEADSUP: HZ=1000 by default on i386


On Thu, 4 Nov 2004, Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:

> We increasingly need better granularity in our sleep/wakeup calls and
> things like device polling and trafic shaping needs higher granularity
> in particular. 
> 
> So pending any really good arguments to the contrary I plan to increase
> HZ to 1000 on i386 this weekend. 

I don't object to increasing HZ, but will note that it results in a slight
increase in overhead relative to lower values on the same hadware.  It was
observed to me, however, that with modern CPUs, running HZ ten times
faster still results in a less overhead than on older processors with the
slower HZ, so... :-)

Robert N M Watson             FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects
robert <at> fledge.watson.org      Principal Research Scientist, McAfee Research

> 
> You can still define any HZ value you like in your kernel config file
> or even set it from the loader.
> 
> -- 
> Poul-Henning Kamp       | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20
> phk <at> FreeBSD.ORG         | TCP/IP since RFC 956
> FreeBSD committer       | BSD since 4.3-tahoe
> Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence.
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-arch <at> freebsd.org mailing list
(Continue reading)

Luigi Rizzo | 4 Nov 15:15 2004

Re: HEADSUP: HZ=1000 by default on i386

On Thu, Nov 04, 2004 at 09:05:45AM -0500, Robert Watson wrote:
...
> I don't object to increasing HZ, but will note that it results in a slight
> increase in overhead relative to lower values on the same hadware.  It was
> observed to me, however, that with modern CPUs, running HZ ten times
> faster still results in a less overhead than on older processors with the
> slower HZ, so... :-)

ok, my turn to say something obvious... lets see...

    "I will note that HZ=1000 is ten time higher than HZ=100,"

nah, he just said that; how about this...

    "modern CPUs are much faster than older processors"

no, he said that too... hmmmm...

    "i don't object to the change"

no, what's the point to speak if i agree...  ok i give up, i have
nothing to say on the subject, but one cannot always be serious...

:)

cheers
luigi

> Robert N M Watson             FreeBSD Core Team, TrustedBSD Projects
> robert <at> fledge.watson.org      Principal Research Scientist, McAfee Research
(Continue reading)

Scott Long | 4 Nov 15:25 2004
Picon

Re: HEADSUP: HZ=1000 by default on i386

Poul-Henning Kamp wrote:
> We increasingly need better granularity in our sleep/wakeup calls and
> things like device polling and trafic shaping needs higher granularity
> in particular.
> 
> So pending any really good arguments to the contrary I plan to increase
> HZ to 1000 on i386 this weekend.
> 
> You can still define any HZ value you like in your kernel config file
> or even set it from the loader.
> 

Sounds like a good plan.

Scott
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch <at> freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe <at> freebsd.org"

Dag-Erling Smørgrav | 4 Nov 17:23 2004
Picon

Re: HEADSUP: HZ=1000 by default on i386

Poul-Henning Kamp <phk <at> phk.freebsd.dk> writes:
> So pending any really good arguments to the contrary I plan to increase
> HZ to 1000 on i386 this weekend.

two good arguments:

  1) I'm already working on this, and you know it, since I asked you
     about it in Karlsruhe.

  2) 1000 is not a good choice, because we can't approximate it well
     with the 8254.  1268 is better, 1381 is even better, 1903 is the
     best we can do between 1000 and 2000, 2299 is the best we can do
     between 1000 and 5000.

DES
--

-- 
Dag-Erling Smørgrav - des <at> des.no
_______________________________________________
freebsd-arch <at> freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe <at> freebsd.org"


Gmane