Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 20 Mar 2015 11:02:02 -0700
From:      Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
To:        Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org>
Cc:        Emeric POUPON <emeric.poupon@stormshield.eu>, freebsd-net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Fragment questions
Message-ID:  <CAJ-Vmo=LkFc4sqbBSVeLE=7adV1nCuRDUO4ECUv8r6EYp=Oezw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <550C5FC6.6020401@selasky.org>
References:  <522774578.25519037.1426765109046.JavaMail.zimbra@stormshield.eu> <550AC709.1050404@selasky.org> <2047974073.25663527.1426858267777.JavaMail.zimbra@stormshield.eu> <550C5FC6.6020401@selasky.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 20 March 2015 at 10:58, Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org> wrote:
> On 03/20/15 14:31, Emeric POUPON wrote:
>>
>> - in the ip_newid macro, we do "htons(V_ip_id++))" if we do not use
>> randomized id.
>
>> In multi core systems, we may emit successive packets with the same id.
>
> Will using a mutex or an atomic macro fix this issue when incrementing the
> V_ip_id ?

It will, but it'll ping-pong between multiple cores and slow things
down at high pps.


-a



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-Vmo=LkFc4sqbBSVeLE=7adV1nCuRDUO4ECUv8r6EYp=Oezw>