Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 15:10:01 GMT From: "bycn82" <bycn82@gmail.com> To: freebsd-ipfw@FreeBSD.org Subject: RE: kern/189720: [ipfw] [patch] pps action for ipfw Message-ID: <201405291510.s4TFA1w5029149@freefall.freebsd.org>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR kern/189720; it has been noted by GNATS. From: "bycn82" <bycn82@gmail.com> To: "'Luigi Rizzo'" <rizzo@iet.unipi.it>, <bug-followup@FreeBSD.org> Cc: Subject: RE: kern/189720: [ipfw] [patch] pps action for ipfw Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 23:06:27 +0800 -----Original Message----- From: Luigi Rizzo [mailto:rizzo@iet.unipi.it]=20 Sent: 29 May, 2014 22:12 To: bug-followup@FreeBSD.org; bycn82@gmail.com Subject: kern/189720: [ipfw] [patch] pps action for ipfw Hi, I have looked at the update from May 13th but it is not ready yet, the = code assumes HZ=3D1000 so 1 tick=3D1ms. The translation can be done in userspace or in the kernel. I would prefer the latter. I see,=20 If the HZ=3D3, that means every tick=3D333ms And if the user wants to =E2=80=9C 1 packet per 500ms=E2=80=9D, then in = the backend will not do the exactly the same as what user expect. Actually the implementation should be =E2=80=9Cpackets per = ticks=E2=80=9D, so how about this? Instead of translate it in codes. Why = not update the document, and explain it to the user in the document ? Please note that the count might need to be adjusted accordingly if 1/HZ = > duration. I covered most of these things in the email exchange before = the patch was submitted. cheers luigi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?201405291510.s4TFA1w5029149>