From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Jun  6 23:00:16 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 41B5B309
 for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri,  6 Jun 2014 23:00:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-qa0-x22e.google.com (mail-qa0-x22e.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c00::22e])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK))
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 05B1129A2
 for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri,  6 Jun 2014 23:00:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-qa0-f46.google.com with SMTP id w8so4938812qac.33
 for <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>; Fri, 06 Jun 2014 16:00:14 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
 bh=2AewTrMxR4Cy6qPmxEaxPWvw2A/Jp773VGhLd3QMVu4=;
 b=k5zjOKhCQYGPu1hLr14FhOZTSJD6b6gEWojyWDwOVwTvVfkJu8VNIT7LkBZIzo22kO
 R+UrzP2IXoG0+WqmXraXjaac9nOZxNSMN5pRSyp+g5/dGYzszlgFBZlBs2kuA/x6RFkS
 5/xYDv/TZSMqrwSpZzWMspobteHyOorCKMyYaWrqmuqRzj8B5gZ9JBiI6crch1OfN2PA
 ZSy3Er+bP8pvT8IoLJENLPTJn1KQQGRc0u1iQAwZhQ3QOazkWglOTFA4ImUXx94I2KVz
 PNPhM6tkd8MSELlnj5zwUKpozEk+6Plpa34cPSEQw6ncVAsmVTrwHyeyBRkpuJD4rQ/Y
 EFKQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.224.47.148 with SMTP id n20mr13573415qaf.90.1402095614399;
 Fri, 06 Jun 2014 16:00:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.170.115.66 with HTTP; Fri, 6 Jun 2014 16:00:14 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Sat, 7 Jun 2014 01:00:14 +0200
Message-ID: <CAAGHsvDhaqQbwir5P+oaH_Qa8VZ0aj9A2SGrn+2shJMQ21B6Jw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Best practice for accepting TCP connections on multicore?
From: Daniel Janzon <janzon@gmail.com>
To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.18
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
 <freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-hackers>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 06 Jun 2014 23:00:16 -0000

Hi,

What is the best practice (performance-wise) for dispatching new TCP
connections to different threads in order to make use of multiple cores?

Is there any better way than doing the accept() call in one thread and then
dispatch it to a thread on another core with any user space method?

Conceivably one should be able to perform the accept() call from several
threads but using the same socket and let the kernel distribute the
incoming connections using some kind of hash or round robin.

Regards,
Daniel