From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Jun 20 10:52:53 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1537C106566C; Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:52:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-listen@fabiankeil.de) Received: from smtprelay04.ispgateway.de (smtprelay04.ispgateway.de [80.67.31.27]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8D798FC1B; Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:52:52 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from freebsd-listen@fabiankeil.de) Received: from [62.143.132.243] (helo=localhost) by smtprelay04.ispgateway.de with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.68) (envelope-from ) id 1MHxvq-00085n-OJ; Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:36:24 +0200 Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 12:36:57 +0200 From: Fabian Keil To: Jeff Roberson Message-ID: <20090620123657.21728020@fabiankeil.de> In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.1 (GTK+ 2.16.2; i386-portbld-freebsd8.0) X-PGP-KEY-URL: http://www.fabiankeil.de/gpg-keys/freebsd-listen-2008-08-18.asc Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Df-Sender: 775067 Cc: current@freebsd.org, net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mbuf layout optimizations 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: Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:52:53 -0000 Jeff Roberson wrote: > http://people.freebsd.org/~jeff/mbuf2.diff > This is a call for testers and feedback on my mbuf layout improvements. > I'm trying to decide whether I will push to have these included in 8.0. > After reducing the scope slightly from my last patch, I have not > encountered any problems. Kip Macy has also been using it for the past > few weeks without issue. > > You should not expect any functional changes from this patch. The goal > is mostly to pave the way fors more sensible mbuf handling in the > future, although it does offer a few performance benefits. So far I haven't been able to reproduce the em-related panic I reported with an earlier version of the patch. I'm not sure if it was reproducible back then, though. Fabian