From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Sep 30 18:29:41 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: arch@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0AE316A41F for ; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 18:29:41 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from andre@freebsd.org) Received: from c00l3r.networx.ch (c00l3r.networx.ch [62.48.2.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 35BEA43D4C for ; Fri, 30 Sep 2005 18:29:39 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from andre@freebsd.org) Received: (qmail 4434 invoked from network); 30 Sep 2005 18:01:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO freebsd.org) ([62.48.0.53]) (envelope-sender ) by c00l3r.networx.ch (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 30 Sep 2005 18:01:56 -0000 Message-ID: <433D8417.D4666378@freebsd.org> Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 20:29:43 +0200 From: Andre Oppermann X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.8 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gleb Smirnoff References: <20050930124000.GA45345@cell.sick.ru> <20050930160302.GJ45345@cell.sick.ru> <20050930181322.GB1768@garage.freebsd.pl> <20050930182325.GO45345@cell.sick.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: arch@FreeBSD.org, Pawel Jakub Dawidek , net@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: [REVIEW/TEST] polling(4) changes X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 18:29:41 -0000 Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > > On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 08:13:22PM +0200, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: > P> On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 08:03:02PM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > P> +> On Fri, Sep 30, 2005 at 04:40:00PM +0400, Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > P> +> T> [please, follow-up on net@ only] > P> +> T> > P> +> T> Colleagues, > P> +> T> > P> +> T> here are some patches for review. > P> +> > P> +> I have some changes to patch after last compile, and haven't tested them > P> +> befire sending patch. Here is an updated one. > P> > P> BTW. Not compiling in DEVICE_POLLING has any advantages except few bytes > P> smaller kernel? > P> I wonder if we could drop yet another kernel option and just set > P> kern.poll.enable to 0 by default. > P> If adding DEVICE_POLLING to the kernel doesn't cost additional locking, etc. > P> in network data flow paths (which could lead to performance impact in some > P> specific environments) can we just compile the code in always? > > It adds a stub function call every tick. The function returns almost > immediately if no interfaces do polling. If it does a FOREACH(interface) then it should stay as a kernel option. -- Andre