Hi,
On Tue, 08 Jan 2013 08:29:51 -0800
Mark Atkinson wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 01/07/2013 18:25, Barney Cordoba wrote:
> > I have a situation where I have to run 9.1 on an old single core
> > box. Does anyone have a handle on whether it's better to build a
On 1/8/13 5:04 PM, Sami Halabi wrote:
hi,
I want to compile new kernel with vimage and multiple.routing tables in
host, would that work? Or to expect kernel panics?
I want to be able to mske.independent stack jails & usr setfib in host to
create vrfs...
done all the time
Thank you in advanc
hi,
I want to compile new kernel with vimage and multiple.routing tables in
host, would that work? Or to expect kernel panics?
I want to be able to mske.independent stack jails & usr setfib in host to
create vrfs...
Thank you in advance,
Sami
___
freebsd
--- On Tue, 1/8/13, Ian Smith wrote:
> From: Ian Smith
> Subject: Re: To SMP or not to SMP
> To: "Garrett Cooper"
> Cc: "Barney Cordoba" , "Erich Dollansky"
> , freebsd-net@freebsd.org
> Date: Tuesday, January 8, 2013, 11:34 AM
> On Tue, 8 Jan 2013 07:57:04 -0800,
> Garrett Cooper wrote:
>
On Tue, Jan 08, 2013 at 11:39:10PM +0100, Olivier Cochard-Labb? wrote:
> Hi,
> I'm try to use netmap pkt-gen on real and virtual (virtualbox)
> hardware with FreeBSD 9.1.
> My setup is pretty simple:
>
> ( HOST1 em0:1.1.1.1 ) <--> ( em0:1.1.1.2 HOST2 )
>
> But I didn't reach to use pkt-gen (f
Hi,
I'm try to use netmap pkt-gen on real and virtual (virtualbox)
hardware with FreeBSD 9.1.
My setup is pretty simple:
( HOST1 em0:1.1.1.1 ) <--> ( em0:1.1.1.2 HOST2 )
But I didn't reach to use pkt-gen (from tools/tools/netmap), I've got
errors (on both physical and virtual machines):
- Una
On Tue, 8 Jan 2013 07:57:04 -0800, Garrett Cooper wrote:
> On Jan 8, 2013, at 7:50 AM, Barney Cordoba wrote:
>
> > --- On Mon, 1/7/13, Erich Dollansky wrote:
> >
> >> From: Erich Dollansky
> >> Subject: Re: To SMP or not to SMP
> >> To: "Barney Cordoba"
> >> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/07/2013 18:25, Barney Cordoba wrote:
> I have a situation where I have to run 9.1 on an old single core
> box. Does anyone have a handle on whether it's better to build a
> non SMP kernel or to just use a standard SMP build with just the
> one co
On Jan 8, 2013, at 7:50 AM, Barney Cordoba wrote:
> --- On Mon, 1/7/13, Erich Dollansky wrote:
>
>> From: Erich Dollansky
>> Subject: Re: To SMP or not to SMP
>> To: "Barney Cordoba"
>> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
>> Date: Monday, January 7, 2013, 10:56 PM
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Mon, 7 Jan 2013 18:2
The only weird crap I've seen with SMP versus non-SMP these days is
some assumptions that it's cheap to alternate between two tasks in a
preemptive kernel.
That behaviour sucks on MIPS.
On SMP machines with enough CPUs/hardware threads, you don't see the
context switch overhead because you have e
--- On Mon, 1/7/13, Erich Dollansky wrote:
> From: Erich Dollansky
> Subject: Re: To SMP or not to SMP
> To: "Barney Cordoba"
> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
> Date: Monday, January 7, 2013, 10:56 PM
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, 7 Jan 2013 18:25:58 -0800 (PST)
> Barney Cordoba
> wrote:
>
> > I have a s
Anh one?
בתאריך 7 בינו 2013 18:09, מאת "Sami Halabi" :
> Hi,
> i have a core router that i want to enable firewall on it.
> is these enough for a start:
>
> ipfw add 100 allow all from any to any via lo0
> ipfw add 25000 allow all from me to any
> ipfw add 25100 allow ip from "table(7)" to me dst-
--On 13 December 2012 15:33 +0400 Gleb Smirnoff wrote:
Nope, there is no autotuning here yet.
The hash table size is hardcoded in sys/net/if_llatbl.h. The name of
constant is LLTBL_HASHTBL_SIZE.
Default is 32, which is even commented with "/* default 32 ? */" - I found
another thread via
13 matches
Mail list logo
