From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 21 14:29:04 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDAD6106566C for ; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 14:29:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from murat@enderunix.org) Received: from istanbul.enderunix.org (freefall.marmara.edu.tr [193.140.143.150]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78B198FC1B for ; Wed, 21 Apr 2010 14:29:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 19660 invoked from network); 21 Apr 2010 14:01:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.41.0.13?) (127.0.0.1) by 0 with SMTP; 21 Apr 2010 14:01:02 -0000 From: Murat Balaban To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Organization: EnderUNIX SDT, Turkey Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 17:00:59 +0300 Message-ID: <1271858459.2018.14.camel@efe> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: read mostly locks and interrupt handlers X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 14:29:05 -0000 Hello net@ folks, I came across some performance problems with BPF on 10G links, and have been investigating more on this. The first thing I noticed is that, bpf_if structures are protected with a mutex. I was wondering if that has been done for a special purpose, i.e. rmlocks are not allowed to run in interrupt context or so? -- Murat