Date: Wed, 28 Dec 2011 10:26:44 +0400 From: Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org> To: Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it> Cc: Pawel Tyll <ptyll@nitronet.pl>, freebsd-net@freebsd.org, "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@freebsd.org>, freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Firewall Profiling. Message-ID: <91777482.20111228102644@serebryakov.spb.ru> In-Reply-To: <20111227142600.GA65456@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> References: <1498545030.20111227015431@nitronet.pl> <4EF9ADBC.8090402@FreeBSD.org> <623366116.20111227150047@nitronet.pl> <20111227142600.GA65456@onelab2.iet.unipi.it>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello, Luigi. You wrote 27 =E4=E5=EA=E0=E1=F0=FF 2011 =E3., 18:26:00: > plans, yes - not sure how long it will take. I have compiled > ipfw+dummynet as a standalone module (outside the kernel) > but have not yet hooked the code to netmap to figure out how fast > it can run. I still don't understand why it should be faster than "normal" way, as it is essentially same (ipfw + dummynet) code + some additional context switches for netmap (to userland and back). What does netmap shave off from packet processing in this particular case, to compensate context switches? I --=20 // Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov <lev@FreeBSD.org>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?91777482.20111228102644>