Michael McConville wrote: > There was a great discussion about softdep recently: > > https://marc.info/?t=142164016900001&r=1&w=2 > > It needs extra memory, so the FAQ warns against its use on really old > architectures. > > tedu@ described the two main deterrents: > > https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=142294185000751&w=2 > > Might it be worth making default for AMD64? The performance gain is big > in many cases.
I'm not sure the tradeoff is such that we can safely switch to softdep by default. Sure, you probably want it, but it remains the case that softdep users report more panics than those who don't use it. Our cost/benefit analysis is skewed towards minimzing risk. Rightly so, imo, even in the case that most users will choose differently. > Index: editor.c > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/src/sbin/disklabel/editor.c,v > retrieving revision 1.295 > diff -u -p -r1.295 editor.c > --- editor.c 8 May 2015 12:15:50 -0000 1.295 > +++ editor.c 24 Jul 2015 00:16:08 -0000 > @@ -51,6 +51,12 @@ > #define NUMBOOT 0 > #endif > > +#if defined(__amd64__) > +#define MNT_OPTS "rw,softdep" Rationale aside, this would never fly. We try to keep the tree as free of arch dependent ifdef as much as possible, doubly so in userland. Definitely the wrong place to be making this change (for future reference, in case you have any other changes for amd64 :)). For that matter, it's also undesirable to have platforms deviate from the default. In some cases, that's unavoidable, but exceptions should be exceptional.
