Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 10:51:02 +0100 From: Harry Schmalzbauer <freebsd@omnilan.de> To: Vincenzo Maffione <v.maffione@gmail.com> Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: Are ./valte-ctl and ./bridge friends or competitors? Message-ID: <58CFA606.7090306@omnilan.de> In-Reply-To: <CA%2B_eA9j30Shp1QB%2B6UY1YRqsWKRo4xqPvDRnMHT25VQL4QhQ_Q@mail.gmail.com> References: <58CBA727.3040108@omnilan.de> <58CBBF7A.8050604@omnilan.de> <CA%2B_eA9jYxRoi2HPcVjKbifTM43nnHeMQGDmmQvsw5UdXtLmFug@mail.gmail.com> <58CC26CF.5050708@omnilan.de> <CA%2B_eA9j30Shp1QB%2B6UY1YRqsWKRo4xqPvDRnMHT25VQL4QhQ_Q@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Bezüglich Vincenzo Maffione's Nachricht vom 18.03.2017 09:29 (localtime): >… >>> Actually, there is pending work on bhyve and netmap, that is going to be >>> merged soon, available at https://github.com/vmaffione/freebsd/ in >>> branch ptnet-head. >>> >>> If you are interested, here there is some information >>> https://wiki.freebsd.org/DevSummit/201609?action= >> AttachFile&do=view&target=20160923-freebsd-summit-ptnet.pdf >>> <https://wiki.freebsd.org/DevSummit/201609?action= >> AttachFile&do=view&target=20160923-freebsd-summit-ptnet.pdf> >>> together with bhyve cmdlines. Congratulations, nice work and presentation :-) … >> So I'm a bit lost regarding furhter decisions. My prefered if_lagg(4) >> setup doesn't work with netmap at the moment, if_bridge(4) has >> in-house-overhead and forces me to either drop jumbo frames completely >> or use 9k MTU for any bridge member. >> Will look into openvSwitch. Or better get some card providing VFs? >> Or wait the ptnet merge and check if I can deploy my desired setup then? >> And, I want to keep TSO and HWVLAN_TAG on the host interfaces… >> >> > It depends on your requirements, in terms of connectivity between VMs and > NICs and required performance (for a given workload, e.g. average > packet-size, average packet rate, etc.). > If you really want TSO an other offloadings on the phyisical NIC, then you > cannot use that NIC in netmap mode (e.g. attaching it to VALE). So to summarize for newbies exploring netmap(4) world in combination with physical uplinks and virtual interfaces, it's important to do the following uplink NIC configuration (ifconfig(8)): -rxcsum -txcsum -rxcsum6 -txcsum6 -tso -lro promisc I guess vlanhwtag, vlanhwfilter and vlanhwtso don't interfere, do they? Thanks, -harry
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?58CFA606.7090306>