From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sat May 24 17:08:36 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70CF32EE; Sat, 24 May 2014 17:08:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pa0-x232.google.com (mail-pa0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c03::232]) (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 352B02B98; Sat, 24 May 2014 17:08:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pa0-f50.google.com with SMTP id fb1so5574729pad.9 for ; Sat, 24 May 2014 10:08:35 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:references:in-reply-to:subject:date:message-id :mime-version:content-type:thread-index:content-language; bh=viJfYpG4Fil/8uRT13XMwYf1QVjWglYO8uMwiWjBzAw=; b=gF/YK3lVpAstPdvxXNpaaI8ZimWU82OJzQ19A5zhlONySKl+9Za8wYoemPGAA0HCt2 R0kKW+I8tXY8YgdHdVH50jLV7xX99Q+sOOv9MIp6K5xiOkS2+Hkq4Yq1lzygTM9FbJIi 8Yz6T6axAq9l1GsjGxf94Ybb8b7c1eRFmBylYmUrFwdDB+UyqDxzt9CcuVCP5ibA4+e4 oRny54l0sGbWrFIlhGS7NmbiZcRUStV6/Oae/WFa6ZGzRH99LFgBn14NLYKIhA3S8+Ix UFGfHGGnl1Jt3zNfrXZ0j5nNbAI7GDdSU5Vz0pqHjvUFgt23/bUPUOQGktK67bbpv1pJ W1Qw== X-Received: by 10.68.139.137 with SMTP id qy9mr15297860pbb.11.1400951315751; Sat, 24 May 2014 10:08:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from billwin7 (amx-tls2.starhub.net.sg. [203.116.164.12]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id wq10sm31439693pac.24.2014.05.24.10.08.31 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 24 May 2014 10:08:35 -0700 (PDT) From: "bycn82" To: "Alexander V. Chernikov" , "Luigi Rizzo" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: a defect in ipfw dummynet Date: Sun, 25 May 2014 01:08:31 +0800 Message-ID: <003701cf7772$cc3bec50$64b3c4f0$@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Ac93a95BPtMHR/tZQky39x87iu6lXAAAn8aA Content-Language: en-us Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.18 Cc: FreeBSD Net X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 24 May 2014 17:08:36 -0000 Hi , After I think it twice, I think the code and the document are OK, But = the problem is from the examples/document on the internet, Because the = existing logic is not accurate. So users can use different measurements = instead of these four which mentioned in the document. For example most = of time I would like to use `kbps` and `KBps`, (It is my fault, I did = not follow the document, ) =20 I would like to recommend to make some changes in the document only,=20 =20 Current document bw bandwidth | device Bandwidth, measured in [K|M]{bit/s|Byte/s}. =20 Change to=20 bw bandwidth | device Bandwidth, support 4 measurements,(Kbit/s, Mbit/s, KByte/s, = MByte/s) all others are officially not recommended. =20 With this document, Some mistakes can be prevented . for example this = one: >ipfw pipe 1 config bw 1BIT/s =20 =20 =20 =20 Best Regards, Bycn82 =20 =20 From: bycn82 [mailto:bycn82@gmail.com]=20 Sent: 25 May, 2014 0:19 To: Alexander V. Chernikov; Luigi Rizzo Cc: FreeBSD Net Subject: a defect in ipfw dummynet =20 Hi Alexander, =20 Since you guys are working on the =E2=80=9Cnamed table=E2=80=9D feature. = So I have stopped implementing it using my way. Hence I got some time to = read more about the existing codes. This afternoon I just started to = read the dummynet part, then I have another question to ask. Maybe it is = not a small defect, Or just because there are some more story which I = don=E2=80=99t know. anyway. =20 For example, when we run command as below,=20 >ipfw pipe config 1 100kbps the userspace program need to read the bandwidth value which is = =E2=80=9C100kbps=E2=80=9D, And I found the code as below,=20 if ((*end =3D=3D 'B' && _substrcmp2(end, "Bi", "Bit/s") !=3D 0) = || _substrcmp2(end, "by", "bytes") =3D=3D = 0) bw *=3D 8; =20 Sure it works. But I want to ask whether it can be more readable If we = list down all the possibilities and directly =E2=80=9Chard code=E2=80=9D = in the source, At least it can be more accurate.=20 =20 With current logic, we have change to have below situation. =20 root@FB10Head:~ # ipfw pipe config 1 bw 1ByeBye <- = the command will be considered as =E2=80=9C1 Byte per second=E2=80=9D root@FB10Head:~ # ipfw pipe 1 show 00001: 8.000 bit/s 0 ms burst 0=20 q131073 50 sl. 0 flows (1 buckets) sched 65537 weight 0 lmax 0 pri 0 = droptail sched 65537 type FIFO flags 0x0 0 buckets 0 active root@FB10Head:~ # =20 =20 =20 =20 =20 Best Regards, Bycn82 =20