From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Mar 14 21:59:50 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C299D943; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 21:59:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rysto32@gmail.com) Received: from mail-oa0-f50.google.com (mail-oa0-f50.google.com [209.85.219.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64994E17; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 21:59:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oa0-f50.google.com with SMTP id l20so2748231oag.23 for ; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 14:59:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=FXG5JHFzahylqQuq+HBb2IMDwWJcXJIDSyNN/Eky6iw=; b=nbyEH1IoKeNcnF3NN4Dl1uYM3Yhu2EMjiDbBJOgDOrjMw9n3+uEMSYr9XcZAJ7WMPt kCKToZxu4S+c7QQ2KuaDxp4Lsj4hRDxnm/3Wl+AhOSUf9sAjZVuSaXuMGu9n0Y6x0knV dHAwTB7PE4/Hp456O9226SsAaS98hIvcw9XcI5AziUHYDOyA6tnDjn6ORV+7mkGhkVg3 Cyt3EcWg3DmgbqLUKTHVPyw8Owmk07zXWs8pqXtgojeZtdmdv4vud9c24Dk1ruCOcsUo woZfe+Bc8v6p/TfdSQBnNFkgnc2EKHd7GSmeWSrLrj5v0DS/Upd+4R91ZvijHYaNH/WP RJpQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.60.12.41 with SMTP id v9mr1985133oeb.75.1363298384256; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 14:59:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.76.109.236 with HTTP; Thu, 14 Mar 2013 14:59:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <201303141500.r2EF01EQ079753@freefall.freebsd.org> References: <201303141500.r2EF01EQ079753@freefall.freebsd.org> Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 17:59:44 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: kern/176446: [netinet] [patch] Concurrency in ixgbe driving out-of-order packet process and spurious RST From: Ryan Stone To: John Baldwin Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 Cc: freebsd-net X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 21:59:50 -0000 What's the benefit in having a both an interrupt thread and task that performs the same function? It seems to me that having two threads that do the same job is what is making this so complicated.