From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Sep 19 15:19:57 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7B93106564A; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 15:19:57 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cell.glebius.int.ru (glebius.int.ru [81.19.64.117]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EF578FC12; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 15:19:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from cell.glebius.int.ru (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by cell.glebius.int.ru (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q8JFJuXC040588; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 19:19:56 +0400 (MSK) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) Received: (from glebius@localhost) by cell.glebius.int.ru (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id q8JFJubb040587; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 19:19:56 +0400 (MSK) (envelope-from glebius@FreeBSD.org) X-Authentication-Warning: cell.glebius.int.ru: glebius set sender to glebius@FreeBSD.org using -f Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 19:19:56 +0400 From: Gleb Smirnoff To: John Baldwin Message-ID: <20120919151956.GL85604@FreeBSD.org> References: <201209171316.45029.jhb@freebsd.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201209171316.45029.jhb@freebsd.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org, Ryan Stone Subject: Re: What's the latest on fixing IFF_DRV_OACTIVE/if_start/etc? X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 15:19:58 -0000 On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 01:16:45PM -0400, John Baldwin wrote: J> On Monday, September 17, 2012 11:49:59 am Ryan Stone wrote: J> > I know that there have been a lot of discussions about fixing how J> > packets are handed off to ifnets due to the current methods being J> > extremely race-prone. Has there been any consensus on how the problem J> > is going to be solved? J> > J> > In my particular case, I've seen an if_bridge interface whose if_snd J> > queue is full, and once an ifnet reaches that point it will never J> > transmit anything ever again unless its driver manually calls the J> > start method somehow. J> > J> > As a short-term fix I'm temped to call to if_start in IFQ_HANDOFF_ADJ J> > even if IFQ_ENQUEUE returns an error, to ensure that the queue will be J> > drained eventually, but I'm wondering if people are actively working J> > on longer-term fixes. J> J> I think for if_bridge the fix is that it no longer uses if_start. :) And this is already in head. :) -- Totus tuus, Glebius.