Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 17:05:41 +0200 From: Volodymyr Kostyrko <c.kworr@gmail.com> To: Jeremy Chadwick <freebsd@jdc.parodius.com> Cc: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@Leidinger.net>, stable@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Reducing the need to compile a custom kernel Message-ID: <4F3926C5.3010403@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <20120210231059.GA25777@icarus.home.lan> References: <20120210145604.Horde.ewjpSpjmRSRPNSH0YRHxgAk@webmail.leidinger.net> <20120210231059.GA25777@icarus.home.lan>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Jeremy Chadwick wrote: > I want to note here: the pf ALTQ options are a pain in the butt, quite > honestly. I've found in the past that removing the ones you don't use > won't result in a successful build, thus one must include them all. We > do need ALTQ support though, for rate-limiting capability. The NOPCC > option is needed for SMP builds, which makes me wonder what the state of > SMP is in this regard -- meaning, on non-SMP builds, is it still safe > to include ALTQ_NOPCC? It seems like I'm missing something. What is good about using non-SMP kernel? -- Sphinx of black quartz judge my vow.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4F3926C5.3010403>