From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Thu Feb 24 15:39:06 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 2E17C106564A
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 15:39:06 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from rysto32@gmail.com)
Received: from mail-ey0-f182.google.com (mail-ey0-f182.google.com
	[209.85.215.182])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B68238FC13
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 15:39:05 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by eyg7 with SMTP id 7so240826eyg.13
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 07:39:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
	:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type;
	bh=+eNUMIQAK+3pOpeshEkwIT4VWpOYmTpXdUC1ab/U4GU=;
	b=MM8q92+z2ocf5eBUC4fIOPAD+OWSPTzttyu9l1nLVYoaX9OsI+Q48NcsF5yHFnAiwE
	ka3jk06Dmin10AELcjllb7HHisQIB2MNxOayigJ4V/zcAmkF1jOvzmT2KkWZCJc06de0
	oIC6EjYGQ1+otjssInLZlLKNERJ+CRC4teMyQ=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:cc:content-type;
	b=DLZBRmD0xgVqdiBVeD5v1xKS0hwoUB0qWTLPqWEfdroqIA5b30xPdGcSvZjVeRL9T6
	049QmO1+gIpzhIDRljNXIyAiZsB5smN1b31PAaHfctjoFtVCp00zUQ60ySJyP5SBgOP6
	6/x8AZpJlA4QzXyO3goBV4PXDJZ67f95GxVlU=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.213.23.5 with SMTP id p5mr1384728ebb.81.1298561944531; Thu, 24
	Feb 2011 07:39:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.213.20.135 with HTTP; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 07:39:04 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <0B0B1ACC-C57B-4F74-85D5-DD2C7F2DAEA5@netasq.com>
References: <0B0B1ACC-C57B-4F74-85D5-DD2C7F2DAEA5@netasq.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 10:39:04 -0500
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=R=pwXwq6Q=_kXcF=Jupg9Z331JCzpoM+UUHOT@mail.gmail.com>
From: Ryan Stone <rysto32@gmail.com>
To: Fabien Thomas <fabien.thomas@netasq.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: FreeBSD Net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Polling with multiqueue support
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 15:39:06 -0000

Ah, you've anticipated me.  This is just the kind of thing that I had
in mind.  I have some comments:

- Why allocate the poll_if_t in ether_poll_register_?  If you let the
driver allocate it you don't have to worry about failure.  And the
driver can embed it in its rx_ring so it doesn't have to worry about
malloc'ing it anyway.  We can also put one it struct ifnet to preserve
the traditional ether_poll_register interface.

- I'd personally prefer it if ether_poll_register_mq didn't require a
struct ifnet to be passed in.  Nothing seems to use the ifnet anymore
and here at $(WORK) we have some non-ifnets that actually register a
polling handler.  Currently they just allocate a struct ifnet to make
the polling code happy but I don't see any reason to require one.

- Also, I don't quite understand why the separate TX step is necessary now.