From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 19 06:05:32 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 006BB37B401; Sat, 19 Apr 2003 06:05:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from samson.dc.luth.se (samson.dc.luth.se [130.240.112.30]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34FCE43F75; Sat, 19 Apr 2003 06:05:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from bj@dc.luth.se) Received: from dc.luth.se (root@bompe.dc.luth.se [130.240.60.42]) by samson.dc.luth.se (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h3JD5TLG019266; Sat, 19 Apr 2003 15:05:29 +0200 (MET DST) Received: from bompe.dc.luth.se (bj@localhost.dc.luth.se [127.0.0.1]) by dc.luth.se (8.12.6/8.11.3) with ESMTP id h3JD5S2F026929; Sat, 19 Apr 2003 15:05:28 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from bj@bompe.dc.luth.se) Message-Id: <200304191305.h3JD5S2F026929@dc.luth.se> X-Mailer: exmh version 2.5 07/13/2001 with nmh-1.0.4 To: "Jin Guojun [DSD]" In-reply-to: Your message of Fri, 18 Apr 2003 13:04:24 PDT. <3EA05A48.D9BB85E7@lbl.gov> Dcc: From: Borje Josefsson X-Disposition-notification-to: Borje.Josefsson@dc.luth.se X-uri: http://www.dc.luth.se/~bj/index.html Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 15:05:28 +0200 Sender: bj@dc.luth.se cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: patch for test (Was: tcp_output starving -- is due to mbuf get delay?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: bj@dc.luth.se List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2003 13:05:32 -0000 Hmm. I'm not sure if I misunderstood if this was ready for another test = run or not. Anyhow - I took the new patch .tgz (which, btw, still had = tcp_input.p in it). I applied the patches (except tcp_input) and tested. Now I get: Panic: bad cur_off 00000 m_p 0xc0a7f400 0xc0a7f400 my_off 0 1448 cc 3407144 As usual, I'm willing to test more when there are an update available. --B=F6rje On Fri, 18 Apr 2003 13:04:24 PDT "Jin Guojun [DSD]" wrote: > Opps, there was a bad file -- tcp_input.p -- which is not working yet. > Also, a patch file -- tcp_usrreq.p -- was missing. > = > I will take the tcp_input.p out and put tcp_usrreq.p in. > When it is finished, I will send another mail out. > = > -Jin > = > Borje Josefsson wrote: > = > > On Thu, 17 Apr 2003 22:12:02 PDT "Jin Guojun [NCS]" wrote: > > > > > I have modified the sockbuf and mbuf operation to double the throug= hput over > > > high bandwidth delay product path. > > > > > > The patch is available at: > > > http://www-didc.lbl.gov/~jin/network/lion/content.html#FreeBSD_= Patches > > > > > > The current modification is for tcp transmission only. > > > > > > I have adapted some code of uipc_socket2.c from Sam Leffler > > > http://www.freebsd.org/~sam/thorpe-stable.patch > > > > > > for tcp receiver, but it has not been tested yet, so the tcp_input.= p is empty. > > > > > > I ignored all record chain (m_nextpkt) related code. The details is= explained at > > > > > > http://www-didc.lbl.gov/~jin/network/lion/content.html#BSDMbuf > > > > > > Once the tcp_input code is tested, I will submit the patch to bugs@= freebsd.org. > > > I may submit the patch regardless if tcp_input code works or not, b= ecause the > > > tcp > > > sender (server) is more important in high-speed network than the re= ceiver > > > (client). > > > > > > It is appreciated if any one can verify the patch and provide feedb= ack. > > > > OK. I have now tried this patch on a newly-installed 4.8R. The patch > > applied fine. When the sysctl net.inet.tcp.liondmask is unset, everyt= hing > > seems OK, but when setting it to 7 (as specified with the patch > > instructions) i get: > > > > Fatal trap 12: page fault while in kernel mode. > > (I could write down all the stuff on addresses etc if it makes sens= e) > > > > when I run ttcp to test the performance. > > > > This is repeatable. > > > > I'm willing to test more, if someone provides me with some hints on w= hat > > to do. > > > > --B=F6rje > =