From owner-freebsd-arch Tue Dec 18 13:42: 1 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from iguana.aciri.org (iguana.aciri.org [192.150.187.36]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7E6FC37B416 for ; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:41:59 -0800 (PST) Received: (from rizzo@localhost) by iguana.aciri.org (8.11.3/8.11.1) id fBILfoe89350; Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:41:50 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo) Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 13:41:50 -0800 From: Luigi Rizzo To: Jonathan Lemon Cc: Bruce Evans , arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: swi_net Message-ID: <20011218134149.A89299@iguana.aciri.org> References: <20011213091957.B39991@iguana.aciri.org> <20011219010205.P4481-100000@gamplex.bde.org> <20011218104750.M377@prism.flugsvamp.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20011218104750.M377@prism.flugsvamp.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.23i Sender: owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG > I'm planning on revising swi_net so that it is possible to run all > network processing under the device interrupt instead of deferring > things to a netisr(). This also has the advantage of eliminating all The thing is, some processing can be quite long (e.g. IPSec, very long ipfw rulesets, multicast when you have a large number of sockets trying to fetch the packet, etc.), so it is not 100% desirable having it run in interrupt context. cheers luigi -----------------------------------+------------------------------------- Luigi RIZZO, luigi@iet.unipi.it . Dip. di Ing. dell'Informazione http://www.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/ . Universita` di Pisa TEL/FAX: +39-050-568.533/522 . via Diotisalvi 2, 56126 PISA (Italy) Mobile +39-347-0373137 -----------------------------------+------------------------------------- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message