2009/9/21 Ed Maste :
> On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 01:43:33PM +0100, Andrew Brampton wrote:
>
> Your analysis is correct; this issue also has a PR, kern/137145.
> http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=kern/137145
>
> As you point out it requires that two threads have a reference
2009/9/21 Bruce Evans :
> On Mon, 21 Sep 2009, Andrew Brampton wrote:
>
>> I've been reading the FreeBSD source code to understand how mbufs are
>> reference counted. However, there are a few bits of code that I'm
>> wondering if they would fail under the exactly
I've been reading the FreeBSD source code to understand how mbufs are
reference counted. However, there are a few bits of code that I'm
wondering if they would fail under the exactly right timing. Take for
example in uipc_mbuf.c:
286 static void
287 mb_dupcl(struct mbuf *n, struct mbuf *m)
288
2009/8/7 Barney Cordoba :
>
> What ever happened to the multi-threaded version of netperf?
>
> Barney
>
A shameless plug, but a couple of years ago I needed a multi-threaded
netperf app for my research, so instead of waiting for netperf to
become multithreaded I wrote a similar app called "threadn
2009/3/27 Luigi Rizzo :
> The load of polling is pretty low (within 1% or so) even with
> polling. The advantage of having interrupts is faster response
> to incoming traffic, not CPU load.
oh, I was under the impression that polling spun in a tight loop, thus
using 100% of the processor. After a
Hi,
Linux has a feature called NAPI, which amongst other things has this
Interrupt initiated polling mode. Whilst the network traffic is quiet
the network interfaces use interrupts, however as soon as the load
becomes higher polling kicks in and stays like that until the load
drops again.
I know t
