From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 26 14:49:42 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99A2C80 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 14:49:42 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from weiler@soe.ucsc.edu) Received: from mail-pa0-f53.google.com (mail-pa0-f53.google.com [209.85.220.53]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 71AA81D7A for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 14:49:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id bh4so2541188pad.12 for ; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 07:49:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ucsc.edu; s=ucsc-google; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=QUPR75uGDlip1Fgso75giP5mvNYEUyFk3KI3+tieJwY=; b=Xq6O71L7CSuTve8Lv0v6bb3DsOOBbAmqml4MljR94ShL2SdYSigSNEKNwmdCtx7A69 Lyl5SAQrr28nn9nVH8MYDGJPNdXBrEKdniaG3nuFOllrGPc8F5guL8Pzab5gKWEF68AR 9GKDeZ1Cxpy+MkgqhtiDIN0OlmR/e2+mfSabU= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc :subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:x-gm-message-state; bh=QUPR75uGDlip1Fgso75giP5mvNYEUyFk3KI3+tieJwY=; b=fr9ovI2hecjGh/mlMOxVWkebe8wSJ1vqmaeXxwRjHWEw05vLMCHfZbxgz30x2KnCra lI/PBHHJKs1KsegpYTa85SyuyiAxRS2kspb8wS0QOrazFtHSyYzCbauvjGOS7OAz4UoH bAfj5PHjWPhnl125apuAjvgU2CwZR7G+uZ2NnkfnITsAni8rO+ZHoqFA8oOiscxg041L /3KvNCAvbnJ3oMQH85q6luvQJKup/BIn1Ati7hszYe6JxvltWwz9jzsVa7EAafoaDFOv /31mJ5bqEAVhhLNn7g01y8VNgOXkB81YddEv5LVih+0M9+F1/otwZUphrab7g62xif/U 56rQ== X-Received: by 10.69.0.132 with SMTP id ay4mr58970979pbd.62.1366987774970; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 07:49:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.0.146] (50-0-69-3.dsl.static.fusionbroadband.com. [50.0.69.3]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id at4sm11958827pbc.40.2013.04.26.07.49.33 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 26 Apr 2013 07:49:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <517A93FE.7020209@soe.ucsc.edu> Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 07:49:34 -0700 From: Erich Weiler User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130328 Thunderbird/17.0.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gleb Smirnoff Subject: Re: pf performance? References: <5176E5C1.9090601@soe.ucsc.edu> <20130426134224.GV76816@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20130426134224.GV76816@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQniaH6UGYKzX4/5uc1XQHjLbrDkJfByixHg8EvGK7TvO8aHjKcDQwGzGaz/U++CVgxok+/m Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 14:49:42 -0000 > The pf isn't a process, so you can't see it in top. pf has some helper > threads however, but packet processing isn't performed by any of them. But the work pf does would show up in 'system' on top right? So if I see all my CPUs tied up 100% in 'interrupts' and very little 'system', would it be a reasonable assumption to think that if I got more CPU cores to handle the interrupts that eventually I would see 'system' load increase as the interrupt load became faster to be handled? And thus increase my bandwidth? In other words, until I see like 100% system usage in one core, I would have room to grow? Sorry for being dense, just trying to squeeze every ounce of blood out of this box that I can... ;) Unfortunately I can't move to FreeBSD 10 because this is a pfSense box and they are locked on 8.1 at the moment for the version I'm running. They are eyeing version 10 for a future release but it may be a year or more before that gets released.