From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Dec 6 17:13:49 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 998CE16A531; Wed, 6 Dec 2006 17:13:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Received: from ebb.errno.com (ebb.errno.com [69.12.149.25]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DEF7643DA2; Wed, 6 Dec 2006 17:11:41 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Received: from [10.0.0.248] (trouble.errno.com [10.0.0.248]) (authenticated bits=0) by ebb.errno.com (8.13.6/8.12.6) with ESMTP id kB6HCNnd074779 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Wed, 6 Dec 2006 09:12:24 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from sam@errno.com) Message-ID: <4576F9F7.9090503@errno.com> Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2006 09:12:23 -0800 From: Sam Leffler User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20060920) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gleb Smirnoff References: <200612060218.kB62IfVn046324@repoman.freebsd.org> <20061206164242.A32496@delplex.bde.org> <20061206154555.GM32700@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20061206154555.GM32700@FreeBSD.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, Marius Strobl , src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org, Bruce Evans Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/pci if_xl.c if_xlreg.h X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2006 17:13:49 -0000 Gleb Smirnoff wrote: > On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 06:01:48PM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote: > B> It's a shame to force all NIC drivers to manage the timeout for this. > B> Most have a timeout for other purposes so I couldn't see how to save > B> much code using a callback, but a callback would be cleaner. (To avoid > B> the race, just move the decrement of the count to drivers.) > > It is a shame to have a two extra fields in struct ifnet, just for > the sake of the drivers that can wedge. It is a shame to go through > the whole list of interfaces every second. > > There are routers with few NICs and dozens of vlan(4) interfaces. There > are also PPP concentrators with up to thousand interfaces and only > one NIC that really needs to have its watchdog. > I agree with both sentiments and as the originator of the ifnet watchdog mechanism I can only say that it's high time it was replaced by something better. My main worry with this change is that people will _blindly_ sweep drivers replacing what was previously a fairly lightweight mechanism with something much more expensive. Sam