From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jun 5 23:22:16 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 01BF937B404 for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 23:22:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rwcrmhc52.attbi.com (rwcrmhc52.attbi.com [216.148.227.88]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4827A43FBD for ; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 23:22:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from interjet.elischer.org (12-232-168-4.client.attbi.com[12.232.168.4]) by attbi.com (rwcrmhc52) with ESMTP id <2003060606221405200mtqi4e>; Fri, 6 Jun 2003 06:22:14 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.elischer.org [127.0.0.1]) by InterJet.elischer.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id XAA16593; Thu, 5 Jun 2003 23:22:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 23:22:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer To: Vincent Jardin In-Reply-To: <200306052213.35422.vjardin@wanadoo.fr> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=X-UNKNOWN Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE cc: Michael Shiu cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Does Netgraph in FBSD 5.x SMP requires GIANT lock? X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2003 06:22:16 -0000 On Thu, 5 Jun 2003, Vincent Jardin wrote: > Maybe one giant2thread node could be introduced into the graphs. It could= put=20 > the messages and the mbufs into a queue from a giant context, then they c= ould=20 > be processed from a thread. there is alreadya lock per node, with read/write/try semantics If you cannot get the lock you queue your data for processing by whoever has the lock.. usually there si no collision, especially since most processing only needs a reader lock, of which there may be more than one. >=20 > Is it a possible architecture or do I forget something ? >=20 > Regards, > Vincent >=20 > Le Jeudi 5 Juin 2003 13:38, Julian Elischer a =E9crit : > > On Thu, 5 Jun 2003, Michael Shiu wrote: > > > Dear all, > > > > > > Just like to know if the netgraph code running 5.x SMP kernel require= s > > > the GIANT lock? > > > > Netgraph has lovking built into it but I have not > > had teh time yet to "thrown the switch" and run it without > > giant. (actually it would only have giant if the edge node that > > introduces the packet has giant, or if it's running > > as a net thread.) > > > > What is your graph like? > > > > > I have the netgraph doing bridging right now but the performance is > > > limited by the CPU (right now, it is something around 100k pkt/s in > > > 4-STABLE). Does adding another CPU together with upgrading to 5.x be = of > > > any help? I guess the bottleneck right now is only one thread is > > > executing in interrupt context with GIANT being held. Am I right? > > > > > > _Michael > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org= " > > > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >=20 > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >=20