On Aug 17, 2012, at 05:24 , Robert Watson wrote:
>
> On Thu, 16 Aug 2012, Oleksandr Tymoshenko wrote:
>
>> projects/armv6 branch was merged to HEAD and should be considered dead now.
>> This patch is a result of a joint effort by many people. Including but not
>> limited to:
>
> Amazing wor
On Oct 2, 2012, at 10:37 , John Baldwin wrote:
> This is very non-obvious to the public at large (e.g. there was no public
> response to one group's inquiry about the second ATF import for example).
> Also, given that you had no idea that sgf@ and obrien@ were working on
> importing NetBSD's
On Oct 8, 2012, at 12:11 , Marcel Moolenaar wrote:
>
> On Oct 4, 2012, at 9:42 AM, Garrett Cooper wrote:
Both parties (Isilon/Juniper) are converging on the ATF porting work
that Giorgos/myself have done after talking at the FreeBSD Foundation
meet-n-greet. I have contributed al
On Feb 6, 2013, at 09:37 , Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2013 at 06:19:27PM +0400, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote:
>> Hello list!
>>
>> Today more and more NICs are capable of splitting traffic to different
>> Rx/TX rings permitting OS to dispatch this traffic on different CPU
>> cores.
On Jan 27, 2013, at 07:24 , Andriy Gapon wrote:
>
> It seems that FreeBSD DTrace currently does not track module loading /
> unloading
> at all. dtrace_module_loaded/dtrace_module_unloaded are both under ifdef sun.
>
> I think that this is a root cause of e.g. fbt probes for some functions
>
Howdy,
The Beyond Buildworld working group discussed many subjects around our build
system, including
upcoming changes to do a better job of addressing embedded systems, the
integration of bmake,
and the need for better incremental build support. The full notes are on the
wiki and
also pasted
Howdy,
At the Network Receive Performance working group at BSDCan we covered a
narrower set of topics
than we normally do, which seems to have resulted in a reasonably sized work
list for improving
our systems in this area. The main issues relate to getting a good API that
addresses multi-queu
On Aug 29, 2013, at 7:49 , Adrian Chadd wrote:
> Hi,
>
> There's a lot of good stuff to review here, thanks!
>
> Yes, the ixgbe RX lock needs to die in a fire. It's kinda pointless to keep
> locking things like that on a per-packet basis. We should be able to do
> this in a cleaner way - we ca
On Sep 14, 2013, at 15:24 , Luigi Rizzo wrote:
>
>
> On Saturday, September 14, 2013, Olivier Cochard-Labbé
> wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> >>
> >> IXIA ? For the timescales we need to address we don't need an IXIA,
> >> a netmap sender is more than enough
On Sep 14, 2013, at 15:24 , Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> On Saturday, September 14, 2013, Olivier Cochard-Labbé
> wrote:
>> On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
>>>
>>> IXIA ? For the timescales we need to address we don't need an IXIA,
>>> a netmap sender is more than enough
>>>
>>
On Sep 19, 2013, at 16:08 , Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:54:34PM -0400, George Neville-Neil wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 14, 2013, at 15:24 , Luigi Rizzo wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Saturday, September 14, 2013, Olivier Cochard-Labb?
11 matches
Mail list logo
