Old Synopsis: "em0: Invalid MAC address" in FreeBSD-Current ( 8.0)
New Synopsis: [em] "em0: Invalid MAC address" in FreeBSD-Current ( 8.0)
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-net
Responsible-Changed-By: linimon
Responsible-Changed-When: Wed Apr 29 05:58:30 UTC 2009
Responsible-Chang
On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 07:09:51AM +1000, Andrew Snow wrote:
> Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> >If i am not mistaken we don't have generic support for interrupt moderation
> >in the kernel but that's a specific NIC feature: it works if the
> >hardware supports it, and it doesn't otherwise.
> >
> >Of course it
Luigi Rizzo wrote:
If i am not mistaken we don't have generic support for interrupt moderation
in the kernel but that's a specific NIC feature: it works if the
hardware supports it, and it doesn't otherwise.
Of course it would be possible to modify polling to implement
generic interrupt mitigati
--- On Tue, 4/28/09, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> From: Luigi Rizzo
> Subject: Re: Interrupts + Polling mode (similar to Linux's NAPI)
> To: "Barney Cordoba"
> Cc: "Paolo Pisati" , fabi...@freebsd.org, "FreeBSD
> Net"
> Date: Tuesday, April 28, 2009, 11:07 AM
> On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 07:26:40AM
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 1:28 PM, Bjoern A. Zeeb
wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Apr 2009, Scott Ullrich wrote:
[snip]
> I have NAT-T on top of that. And I am currently doing the whatever
> you'll call it 'final pass', will send it back to Yvan once I am done
> with the last 2 items and last 400 lines of key.c
The following reply was made to PR kern/132715; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Maxim Ignatenko
To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org, g...@wp.pl
Cc: freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: kern/132715: [lagg] [panic] Panic when creating vlan's on lagg
interface
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 21:05:34
The following reply was made to PR kern/132715; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Maxim Ignatenko
To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org, g...@wp.pl
Cc: freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: kern/132715: [lagg] [panic] Panic when creating vlan's on lagg
interface
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:47:29
The following reply was made to PR kern/132715; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Maxim Ignatenko
To: bug-follo...@freebsd.org, g...@wp.pl
Cc: freebsd-curr...@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: kern/132715: [lagg] [panic] Panic when creating vlan's on lagg
interface
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:32:37
On Tue, 28 Apr 2009, Scott Ullrich wrote:
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 8:07 AM, VANHULLEBUS Yvan wrote:
See recent archives, there is actually an issue with the patchset, as
there are no more available bits in struct inp's flags.
We're working on that to find and implement the best solution.
Hi,
Fabien Thomas wrote:
To share my results:
I have done at work modification to the polling code to do SMP polling
(previously posted to this ml).
SMP polling (dynamic group of interface binded to CPU) does not
significantly improve the throughput (lock contention seems to be the
cause here)
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 8:07 AM, VANHULLEBUS Yvan wrote:
> See recent archives, there is actually an issue with the patchset, as
> there are no more available bits in struct inp's flags.
> We're working on that to find and implement the best solution.
Hi,
Ermal Luci recently whipped the pfSense'
I have done at work modification to the polling
code to do SMP polling (previously posted to this ml).
SMP polling (dynamic group of interface binded to
CPU) does not significantly improve the throughput (lock
contention seems to be the cause here).
The main advantage of polling with modern
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 07:26:40AM -0700, Barney Cordoba wrote:
...
> The problem with all of this "analysis" is that it assumes that SMP
> coding scales intuitively; when the opposite is actually true.
>
> What you fail to address is the basic fact that moderated interrupts
> (ie holding off int
--- On Tue, 4/28/09, Fabien Thomas wrote:
> From: Fabien Thomas
> Subject: Re: Interrupts + Polling mode (similar to Linux's NAPI)
> To: "Paolo Pisati"
> Cc: "FreeBSD Net"
> Date: Tuesday, April 28, 2009, 5:49 AM
> Le 28 avr. 09 à 11:04, Paolo Pisati a écrit :
>
> > Fabien Thomas wrote:
>
On Tue, Apr 28, 2009 at 12:08:24PM +0200, Giulio Ferro wrote:
> What's the status of NATT patch in 8 current? Is it usable?
Hi.
See recent archives, there is actually an issue with the patchset, as
there are no more available bits in struct inp's flags.
We're working on that to find and implement
What's the status of NATT patch in 8 current? Is it usable?
Thanks.
___
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Le 28 avr. 09 à 11:04, Paolo Pisati a écrit :
Fabien Thomas wrote:
To share my results:
I have done at work modification to the polling code to do SMP
polling (previously posted to this ml).
SMP polling (dynamic group of interface binded to CPU) does not
significantly improve the throu
Fabien Thomas wrote:
To share my results:
I have done at work modification to the polling code to do SMP polling
(previously posted to this ml).
SMP polling (dynamic group of interface binded to CPU) does not
significantly improve the throughput (lock contention seems to be the
cause here)
To share my results:
I have done at work modification to the polling code to do SMP polling
(previously posted to this ml).
SMP polling (dynamic group of interface binded to CPU) does not
significantly improve the throughput (lock contention seems to be the
cause here).
The main advantag
19 matches
Mail list logo
