From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Dec  6 03:50:59 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9BF7C194;
 Fri,  6 Dec 2013 03:50:59 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-qe0-x230.google.com (mail-qe0-x230.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c02::230])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E0B21669;
 Fri,  6 Dec 2013 03:50:59 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-qe0-f48.google.com with SMTP id gc15so119188qeb.35
 for <multiple recipients>; Thu, 05 Dec 2013 19:50:58 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject
 :from:to:cc:content-type;
 bh=J41ZYyv2zM12gpm4hTJRsBZIJO9j6ai5ubyi0NvaAhQ=;
 b=bAT6sFNJnbcw8+8RESL27KPy3tmRymlOWsfAsiBp9OTBi1Hk6mjcJSnIp5KCUExQbk
 6nkdztjH/VR2pXgLmwf194RU9HEVZFvKFfKYKcm3Xjt0ktE9W7VqHtQ7pz5ZQfvJYrOw
 pdCUziOT+7Jdt3Min6Hm+lJb33/fK0vF8q04oZeKPQ3ZRN6OCvtLB52DXZQ09j6WEEes
 LEfFGPothrY8eQy4cH4U0pv/nD3W4h4sW3bJCehQSon0e8FjTiHD9DAsQ1x8hm+zbfUU
 xyBO2D5FrCDKQW8wPDS/NyMEPjikV+f39LHz9mx867vrn6CsLXXiYgLqzRxScDP6LmK1
 3jeA==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.49.116.141 with SMTP id jw13mr2419321qeb.2.1386301858239;
 Thu, 05 Dec 2013 19:50:58 -0800 (PST)
Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com
Received: by 10.224.53.200 with HTTP; Thu, 5 Dec 2013 19:50:58 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAMOc5cznTT-0qOUrG1F55=yPpbWfn3EqWT4+V_RDqG6+DCckOQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAPBZQG29BEJJ8BK=gn+g_n5o7JSnPbsKQ-=3=6AkFOxzt+=wGQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4053E074-EDC5-49AB-91A7-E50ABE36602E@freebsd.org>
 <CALDtMrKvwXW-ou8X7zsKx2ST=dKD7FqHvvnQtGo30znTWU+VQQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPBZQG0=bcHyv7aZse=WKfjk5=6D2-+6EQHiAaDZqGtaodhMMA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMOc5cwFGwk0dS5VT-YxfP3Yt38R8aO-KJTX6W832uOFEdavgA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJ-Vmonc7SVxndmVN1jphFRa5svD5BdnMrCudSbYkx4djHXW0A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMOc5cyM-+vau7BsZQ5F5L95EQgN=pJqru=9aK_0aJ+VUk=gxQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAJ-VmokQ_C_t=pZF5QnWMzjzw6YVqTD4ny3hv_cLDch-m2EOmg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAMOc5cznTT-0qOUrG1F55=yPpbWfn3EqWT4+V_RDqG6+DCckOQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2013 19:50:58 -0800
X-Google-Sender-Auth: BJDVu1NITTCeRaUA2CYm0PA57Pw
Message-ID: <CAJ-Vmoko+Gz4PdYJTaLg-22BrQqG0qO9hq+ZadPwwCPgkTsGNg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] SO_REUSEADDR and SO_REUSEPORT behaviour
From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
To: Sepherosa Ziehau <sepherosa@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Ermal_Lu=E7i?= <eri@freebsd.org>,
 freebsd-net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, Oleg Moskalenko <mom040267@gmail.com>,
 Tim Kientzle <kientzle@freebsd.org>,
 "freebsd-current@freebsd.org" <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/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: Fri, 06 Dec 2013 03:50:59 -0000

I was thinking of n netisrs per m CPUs, where n < m; or maybe 1 netisr
for m CPUs, where m is less than the total number.

Having 48 cores contending on netisr stuff is a bit crazy. It's highly
unlikely you need that many cores doing packet pushing.


-a