Date: Wed, 29 Mar 2006 10:07:27 -0800 From: Brooks Davis <brooks@one-eyed-alien.net> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Cc: arch@freebsd.org, Harti Brandt <harti@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: netatm: plan for removal unless an active maintainer is found Message-ID: <20060329180727.GA10956@odin.ac.hmc.edu> In-Reply-To: <20060329110421.M19236@fledge.watson.org> References: <20060315004530.B5861@fledge.watson.org> <20060329100513.D19236@fledge.watson.org> <20060329123238.B87509@beagle.kn.op.dlr.de> <20060329110421.M19236@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] On Wed, Mar 29, 2006 at 11:13:34AM +0000, Robert Watson wrote: > > On Wed, 29 Mar 2006, Harti Brandt wrote: > > >On Wed, 29 Mar 2006, Robert Watson wrote: > > > >RW>On Wed, 15 Mar 2006, Robert Watson wrote: > >RW> > >RW>> In order to begin to merge revised socket/pcb code, required to fix a > >RW>> number of current races manifesting in the TCP code under load, and > >RW>> required for breaking out the tcbinfo lock which is a significant > >RW>> bottleneck in high performance TCP and multi-processor TCP > >scalability, I > >RW>> will disconnect netatm and dependent components from the build on > >April 1, > >RW>> 2006. At that point, I will merge updated socket and pcb reference > >RW>> counting. > >RW> > >RW>Reminder: April 1 approaches. > >RW> > >RW>I've merged changes to many non-netinet protocols in support of the > >RW>approaching socket/pcb reference model changes, but have the netinet > >changes > >RW>depend on completing socket layer changes that are believed not to work > >with > >RW>netatm as they stand. I'll be posting the socket and netinet changes to > >RW>arch@ today; I've posted them previously to other lists, such as > >current@. > > > >Skip Ford expressed interest in netatm, but he said also that he would > >continue to work on HARP even when it is removed. So I guess it could be > >revived in the future (just in the case). I've also sent him my half -IDT > >driver and he said he will first work on this. When this is ready we have > >all the hardware supported in ngATM which HARP also does. > > I have patches, and plan to commit them, that keep netatm compilable. The > problem is that I am unable to test netatm, and have limited time to try to > figure it out (and it's significant enough that it requires figuring out). I'd be moderatly suprised if it worked at all. None of the ATM code was fun to deal with when I move struct ifnet out of the softc, but IIRC netatm way by far the most confusing. -- Brooks -- Any statement of the form "X is the one, true Y" is FALSE. PGP fingerprint 655D 519C 26A7 82E7 2529 9BF0 5D8E 8BE9 F238 1AD4 [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEKszeXY6L6fI4GtQRAgdLAKCJmAFAFiVpdudClqVgoY9TjrnBgwCgtp6m 9kpy1GutM8ssq1XqfgK3qI0= =APPd -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060329180727.GA10956>