From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Jan 28 11:45:00 2004
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02EFD16A4CE
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:45:00 -0800 (PST)
Received: from c7.campus.utcluj.ro (c7.campus.utcluj.ro [193.226.6.226])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E6CA943D5A
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:44:42 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from veedee@c7.campus.utcluj.ro)
Received: (qmail 16304 invoked by uid 1008); 28 Jan 2004 19:44:35 -0000
From: veedee@c7.campus.utcluj.ro
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 21:44:35 +0200
To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Message-ID: <20040128194435.GA16076@c7.campus.utcluj.ro>
References: <B2508BB3-51C7-11D8-B168-000A95A8A1F2@dragondata.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <B2508BB3-51C7-11D8-B168-000A95A8A1F2@dragondata.com>
Subject: Re: DEVICE_POLLING with SMP
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 19:45:00 -0000

On Wed, Jan 28, 2004 at 01:25:13PM -0600, Kevin Day wrote:
> 
> Has anyone made any headway with getting polling(4) to work with a SMP 
> kernel?  Last May this was discussed on here briefly with me, Luigi and 
> Don Bowman, which seemed to indicate that the majority of what needed 
> to be fixed to make this work would be some kind of locking in 
> idle_loop to make sure only one CPU gets into the polling code at once.
> 
> I've got a case where enabling SMP gives me a 20-30% performance boost, 
> or if I turn polling on I get another 10-15% boost. I'd love to see 
> what the two together could do. 

I was just about to ask the same question. We've just received 2 Athlon MPs
2400+ and we're about to buy a gigabit Intel PRO/1000MT Dual for one of our
servers.

It would be great if SMP could be combined with polling.
-- 
| Radu Bogdan 'veedee' Rusu
| NetSysAdm at campus dot utcluj dot ro
| Personal gallery at http://rbrusu.com
| ...mirroring FreeBSD and coffee