From owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 15 02:17:26 2003 Return-Path: Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9EBF716A4CE; Sat, 15 Nov 2003 02:17:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from xorpc.icir.org (xorpc.icir.org [192.150.187.68]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9574C43F93; Sat, 15 Nov 2003 02:17:25 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo@xorpc.icir.org) Received: from xorpc.icir.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by xorpc.icir.org (8.12.9p1/8.12.3) with ESMTP id hAFAHNFw008940; Sat, 15 Nov 2003 02:17:23 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo@xorpc.icir.org) Received: (from rizzo@localhost) by xorpc.icir.org (8.12.9p1/8.12.3/Submit) id hAFAHMkr008939; Sat, 15 Nov 2003 02:17:22 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from rizzo) Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 02:17:22 -0800 From: Luigi Rizzo To: Robert Watson Message-ID: <20031115021722.A7670@xorpc.icir.org> References: <20031114132714.A88606@xorpc.icir.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i In-Reply-To: ; from rwatson@FreeBSD.org on Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 04:33:18PM -0500 cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org cc: Sam Leffler cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/dev/an if_an.c if_anreg.h src/sys/dev/bfe if_bfe.c src/sys/dev/my if_my.c src/sys/dev/owi if_owi.c if_wivar.h src/sys/dev/re if_re.c src/sys/dev/wl if_wl.c src/sys/pci if_dc.c if_dcreg.h if_pcn.c if_pcnreg.h if_rl.c ... X-BeenThere: cvs-all@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the entire tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 15 Nov 2003 10:17:26 -0000 On Fri, Nov 14, 2003 at 04:33:18PM -0500, Robert Watson wrote: ... > I can think of two concerns with that: first, that interface locks may be > handled differently for different interfaces, and second, that in the > future we may want to avoid an unlock/lock pair for each packet input. > I've been running with local patches intended to reduce the number of > unlock/lock pairs for coalesced interrupt handling by only unlocking to > deliver chains of mbufs to if_input rather than individual mbufs. I.e., as i was telling Sam, i doubt you'll see any coalescing except in cases od DoS attacks on GigE interfaces, or with very slow boxes. As a matter of fact, in the latter case the risk is looping in the driver up to mbuf exhaustion, and then passing up a zillion buffer to if_input() in a single call. Which basically has the same problem of deferred dispatch through netisr. (easy fix there, limit the burst size to some small value such as 5-10 buffers). cheers luigi