On Sun, 30 Jun 2002, Anthony Volodkin wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Julian Elischer suggested that I use mpd to setup a pptp link instead of
> PoPtoP (thank you)
> I am now having problems with mpd. I configured it as a pptp server
> accoring to instructions, but it never responds to requests.
> Furthe
Hi,
Julian Elischer suggested that I use mpd to setup a pptp link instead of
PoPtoP (thank you)
I am now having problems with mpd. I configured it as a pptp server
accoring to instructions, but it never responds to requests.
Furthermore, I doubt it even listens for them, because it does not
On Sat, Jun 29, 2002 at 07:08:44PM -0400, Bosko Milekic wrote:
...
> I would prefer to see an interface that just grabs both a cluster and
> an mbuf from their respective per-CPU caches (in -CURRENT) while only
> grabbing the lock once, if at all this is that important to you. [*]
I have to
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED]> you write:
>
>On Sat, Jun 29, 2002 at 03:46:31PM -0700, Jeffrey Hsu wrote:
>> So, what you want is something like a
>> MGETHCL(m, how, type)
>> MHCLFREE(m)
>> interface which first looks in a combined freelist before the individual
>> mbuf and cluster freeli
> > So, what you want is something like a
> > MGETHCL(m, how, type)
> > MHCLFREE(m)
> > interface which first looks in a combined freelist before the individual
> > mbuf and cluster freelists. I think it's a good idea.
>
> I would prefer to see an interface that just grabs b
I'd say yes.
you could let uma hold them for you
as it has support for 'constructors and destructors' for
types you ask it to manage. it will call the constructor whenever it needs
to create a new one and teh destructor when it gives that memeory
back to the system. In between the two operations
On Sat, Jun 29, 2002 at 04:11:20PM -0700, Alfred Perlstein wrote:
> If the pool is per-device-softc then it doesn't need locks and will
> be a lot more efficient than even grabbing from the per cpu pool.
We have an allocator that does per-CPU allocations, we don't need to
add additional laye
* Bosko Milekic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020629 16:09] wrote:
>
> On Sat, Jun 29, 2002 at 03:46:31PM -0700, Jeffrey Hsu wrote:
> > So, what you want is something like a
> > MGETHCL(m, how, type)
> > MHCLFREE(m)
> > interface which first looks in a combined freelist before the individual
> > m
On Sat, Jun 29, 2002 at 03:46:31PM -0700, Jeffrey Hsu wrote:
> So, what you want is something like a
> MGETHCL(m, how, type)
> MHCLFREE(m)
> interface which first looks in a combined freelist before the individual
> mbuf and cluster freelists. I think it's a good idea.
I would pre
So, what you want is something like a
MGETHCL(m, how, type)
MHCLFREE(m)
interface which first looks in a combined freelist before the individual
mbuf and cluster freelists. I think it's a good idea.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-net" in
Hi,
during some experiments i was doing recently, i noticed that there
is a significant improvement in the forwarding speed (especially
at very high speeds) if we keep a small pool of mbuf+cluster
ready for use. This is because most network drivers do something
like this
MGETHDR(m
Hi,
looking at the code in ip_flow.c, i notice that the hash
function ipflow_hash() uses both the source and destination
address as parameters, and additionally, it never considers
the lower two bits of the destination addres. The code is below,
IPFLOW_HASHBITS is 6:
unsigned hash = tos;
Thanks for the response Mike, but pppoe still seems to be broken.
Disableing vjcomp didn't seem to work for me. I tried it with
enable vjcomp
disable vjcomp
in my ppp.conf file. Didn't seem to help. I did get Brian Somer's fix
to /usr/src/sys/netgraph/ng_pppoe.c This didn't seem to help eit
13 matches
Mail list logo
