Re: forwarding/ipfw/pf evolution (in pps) on -current

2013-04-24 Thread Olivier Cochard-Labbé
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Sami Halabi wrote: > 3. there some point of improved performance (without fw) that went down > again somewhere before Clang got prod. Found it ! It's commit 242402: "Rework the known mutexes..." ministat -s 242401.forwarding 242402.forwarding x 242401.forwarding

[head tinderbox] failure on mips64/mips

2013-04-24 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2013-04-25 00:07:39 - tinderbox 2.10 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca TB --- 2013-04-25 00:07:39 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012 d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 TB --- 2013

Re: forwarding/ipfw/pf evolution (in pps) on -current

2013-04-24 Thread Mike Tancsa
On 4/24/2013 6:45 AM, Olivier Cochard-Labbé wrote: > # Why all these benchs ? # > > I've found performance regression regarding packet forwarding/ipfw/pf > speed on -current comparing to 9.1 on my old server. BTW, how much of a drop in performance as compared to 9.1 ? ---Mike -- --

Re: forwarding/ipfw/pf evolution (in pps) on -current

2013-04-24 Thread Julian Elischer
On 4/24/13 6:45 PM, Olivier Cochard-Labbé wrote: Hi all, here is the result of my simple-and-dummy bench script regarding forwarding/ipfw/pf performance evolution on -current on a single-core server with one flow only. It's the result of more than 810 bench tests (including reboot between each)

Re: panic on a NULL turnstile on boot on r249810

2013-04-24 Thread Gleb Smirnoff
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:25:02AM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: T> just upgraded from r245115 to r249810 and now box reliably panics on T> boot a second after mounting root. I've nailed it down. It is a stack buffer overflow in the nvidia-driver. I've submitted patch to port maintainer. -- Totu

Re: CURRENT (r249438): (devel/libiconv)./unistd.h:686:5: error: invalid token at start of a preprocessor expression : #if @GNULIB_EUIDACCESS@

2013-04-24 Thread O. Hartmann
On Tue, 2013-04-23 at 21:03 +0200, Dimitry Andric wrote: > On Apr 17, 2013, at 21:16, Jung-uk Kim wrote: > > On 2013-04-17 06:07:47 -0400, Dimitry Andric wrote: > >> On Apr 17, 2013, at 07:31, Jan Beich wrote: > >>> Dimitry Andric writes: On Apr 16, 2013, at > >>> 00:42, Jan Beich wrote: > >> .

Re: 'service named reload' with non-default system directories.

2013-04-24 Thread Ian FREISLICH
Sean Bruno wrote: > Would we need a change to /etc/defaults/rc.conf to set ${named_confdir} > to the default location if not set? I'm not sure. It's derived: load_rc_config $name # Updating the following variables requires that rc.conf be loaded first # required_dirs="$named_chrootdir"#

Re: 'service named reload' with non-default system directories.

2013-04-24 Thread Sean Bruno
On Wed, 2013-04-24 at 16:35 +0200, Ian FREISLICH wrote: > > --- /usr/src/etc/rc.d/named 2013-04-15 20:17:58.0 +0200 > +++ /etc/rc.d/named 2013-04-24 16:16:52.0 +0200 > @@ -109,7 +109,7 @@ > > named_reload() > { > - ${command%/named}/rndc reload > + ${comman

'service named reload' with non-default system directories.

2013-04-24 Thread Ian FREISLICH
Hi I often run named outside of the system default directories so that amongst other things a mergemaster fumble doesn't break my name servers. This however breaks rndc because it is not imbued with the clue of where to find its key. /etc/rc.d/named does create the key file in the correct place

[head tinderbox] failure on mips64/mips

2013-04-24 Thread FreeBSD Tinderbox
TB --- 2013-04-24 12:49:07 - tinderbox 2.10 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca TB --- 2013-04-24 12:49:07 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012 d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64 TB --- 2013

Re: forwarding/ipfw/pf evolution (in pps) on -current

2013-04-24 Thread Andre Oppermann
On 24.04.2013 12:45, Olivier Cochard-Labbé wrote: Hi all, here is the result of my simple-and-dummy bench script regarding forwarding/ipfw/pf performance evolution on -current on a single-core server with one flow only. It's the result of more than 810 bench tests (including reboot between each)

Re: forwarding/ipfw/pf evolution (in pps) on -current

2013-04-24 Thread Olivier Cochard-Labbé
On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 1:46 PM, Sami Halabi wrote: > Oliver, > Great and impressive job. Thanks, > 3. there some point of improved performance (without fw) that went down > again somewhere before Clang got prod. => Yes, I'm still working on detected the commit that create this degradation. >

Re: forwarding/ipfw/pf evolution (in pps) on -current

2013-04-24 Thread Sami Halabi
Oliver, Great and impressive job. If I interpret the plot as is the result say (approximatly of course): 1. Forwarding using ipfw with single rule degrades ~25% the pps. 2. Forwarding with pf however gets ~50%+ of degredation if performance pps. 3. there some point of improved performance (without

forwarding/ipfw/pf evolution (in pps) on -current

2013-04-24 Thread Olivier Cochard-Labbé
Hi all, here is the result of my simple-and-dummy bench script regarding forwarding/ipfw/pf performance evolution on -current on a single-core server with one flow only. It's the result of more than 810 bench tests (including reboot between each) done twice for validating my methodology. # Discla