From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Feb 13 15:42:46 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F19C21065674 for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2012 15:42:46 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jdc@koitsu.dyndns.org) Received: from qmta01.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net (qmta01.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net [76.96.62.16]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A8228FC08 for ; Mon, 13 Feb 2012 15:42:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from omta05.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.62.43]) by qmta01.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id ZTA71i0060vyq2s51TVXuh; Mon, 13 Feb 2012 15:29:31 +0000 Received: from koitsu.dyndns.org ([67.180.84.87]) by omta05.westchester.pa.mail.comcast.net with comcast id ZTVV1i00K1t3BNj3RTVWvb; Mon, 13 Feb 2012 15:29:31 +0000 Received: by icarus.home.lan (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 95F66102C1E; Mon, 13 Feb 2012 07:29:28 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 07:29:28 -0800 From: Jeremy Chadwick To: Volodymyr Kostyrko Message-ID: <20120213152928.GA74772@icarus.home.lan> References: <20120210145604.Horde.ewjpSpjmRSRPNSH0YRHxgAk@webmail.leidinger.net> <20120210231059.GA25777@icarus.home.lan> <4F3926C5.3010403@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F3926C5.3010403@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: Alexander Leidinger , stable@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: Reducing the need to compile a custom kernel X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 15:42:47 -0000 On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 05:05:41PM +0200, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote: > 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? Nothing. It's a question of whether or not use of ALTQ_NOPCC causes breakage on non-SMP kernels, or if FreeBSD even bothers to support non-SMP at this point. "Non-SMP" means "without options SMP". Rephrased: if SMP is the default, and "options SMP" works just fine on systems without multiple processors/cores, then the ALTQ_NOPCC option should probably be removed. -- | Jeremy Chadwick jdc@parodius.com | | Parodius Networking http://www.parodius.com/ | | UNIX Systems Administrator Mountain View, CA, US | | Making life hard for others since 1977. PGP 4BD6C0CB |