From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 3 16:53:44 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D5661065674; Sat, 3 Mar 2012 16:53:44 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kmacybsd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com (mail-iy0-f182.google.com [209.85.210.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5CBC8FC08; Sat, 3 Mar 2012 16:53:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iahk25 with SMTP id k25so4858810iah.13 for ; Sat, 03 Mar 2012 08:53:43 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of kmacybsd@gmail.com designates 10.50.186.230 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.50.186.230; Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of kmacybsd@gmail.com designates 10.50.186.230 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=kmacybsd@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=kmacybsd@gmail.com Received: from mr.google.com ([10.50.186.230]) by 10.50.186.230 with SMTP id fn6mr2106484igc.30.1330793623266 (num_hops = 1); Sat, 03 Mar 2012 08:53:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=vCinLuJi0LGWq7wZX2WSwRmZ1YPQpk1UuRZ9XZJ1M88=; b=Dm65CIwegWbiMG/whZ9rlVl1xT7on3hjyvrdlGxWnBazU4moc8ivDk0vVZIGr1IqJO yN03ZorVM+M5wdiDE6P6XtBwm9D8suDafKWAbl71ebuTTAx7wKSe8YwkXLglJOIz50jB GhEyXbCTvGbOeTqIUuNXWRXOPdUswz1EZg0CLQbYZFXBRYNcHGHaC9JqWHhWTRKFdOmH +O8HEG/yK3Q50N4+IglrTj/W74UL2ZF3VZnz1KDvPMSdc2BKs0jF5ZnGZugoq0Qgfbs9 feLTcZN/MermyoNbwQWmJz9rEpq+9eWx+KGkl8IpKNcC0rqXOLOsF+nVSInBxBXvkhQE P0sQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.50.186.230 with SMTP id fn6mr1750001igc.30.1330793623206; Sat, 03 Mar 2012 08:53:43 -0800 (PST) Sender: kmacybsd@gmail.com Received: by 10.50.134.106 with HTTP; Sat, 3 Mar 2012 08:53:43 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <20120221143537.Horde.deyFDZjmRSRPQ52pxBIpnLA@webmail.leidinger.net> <4F4BA707.5070608@wasikowski.net> <4F4C3FE7.3040802@FreeBSD.org> <4F4D51CB.2010508@FreeBSD.org> <4F4D5E5D.9040302@FreeBSD.org> <4F4DD288.5060106@FreeBSD.org> <4F4ED889.2070608@FreeBSD.org> <4F500BB9.4040307@FreeBSD.org> <4F5088CA.1090108@FreeBSD.org> <4F510FBD.50008@FreeBSD.org> <4F51BEE0.7090108@freebsd.org> Date: Sat, 3 Mar 2012 17:53:43 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 9d-IF_K-7ujGQLIfVF4DjiYk45o Message-ID: From: "K. Macy" To: Garrett Cooper Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Doug Barton , FreeBSD Stable , =?ISO-8859-2?Q?z_W=B1sikowski?= , FreeBSD Current , Arnaud Lacombe , "Bjoern A. Zeeb" , Alexander Leidinger Subject: Re: flowtable usable or not X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 03 Mar 2012 16:53:44 -0000 > Less effort is required to get greater profit without having to mess > around with things because they fit the generic case as opposed to a > number of niche cases or provide OS features that a user may or may > not use. My initial venting of my frustrations at Doug appears to have turned an open-ended discussion of FreeBSD's merits as a desktop vs. a server OS. I don't have the inclination to read every response closely, but I think that it is generating more heat than light. I have three points that I would like to make before I attempt to transition this thread back to its initial purpose: a) We as a members of the community are collectively responsible for the state of FreeBSD. Simply disabling features or removing functionality that doesn't work or doesn't work optimally and / or filing bug reports but not being able or willing to respond to feedback requests is in essence a form of neglect. Although we all have day to day obligations for which the use of FreeBSD is extremely impractical if not impossible ... any progress, any improvements, any advancements will only happen because *we* made it happen. b) There are many features and many changes that are introduced in to FreeBSD which extend the potential user base which are of no obvious benefit to many users. Just because one doesn't need a feature and doesn't hear users crying out for it, doesn't mean that it isn't important. c) My grievance was in no way with Doug Barton or ports per se, but with his response as a representative instance of a behaviour which bothers me, and, taken over time, is detrimental to the whole. Back to the initial subject line: "flowtable usable or not" It is possible to re-structure the routing code to have a smaller cache footprint / shorter lookup time / and eliminate all locking in the packet transmit path (ip_output, ip_forward). However, it would take more time and effort than I have to do so as a recreational activity. The set of people able to fund such an effort is non-intersecting with the set of people who would benefit the most heavily from it. Hence, for the time being, for those who want to be able to approach anywhere near 1Mpps, much less 10 or 15 times that, whilst continuing to use the regular stack (i.e. not running netmap) we are left only with flowtable for bypassing the locking and compute overhead of per-packet route lookups. It is beyond debate that under some, if not many, circumstances flowtable was unusable and perhaps continues to be. Hence, any further reports of "it was broken so I turned it off, and now my life is better" should be left unsent. If you, the reader, are willing to contribute to the testing of changes, provide backtraces from cores etc. please follow up. Thank you for your support. Cheers, Kip --=20 =A0 =A0=93The real damage is done by those millions who want to 'get by.' The ordinary men who just want to be left in peace. Those who don=92t want their little lives disturbed by anything bigger than themselves. Those with no sides and no causes. Those who won=92t take measure of their own strength, for fear of antagonizing their own weakness. Those who don=92t like to make waves=97or enemies. =A0 =A0Those for whom freedom, honour, truth, and principles are only literature. Those who live small, love small, die small. It=92s the reductionist approach to life: if you keep it small, you=92ll keep it under control. If you don=92t make any noise, the bogeyman won=92t find you. =A0 =A0But it=92s all an illusion, because they die too, those people who roll up their spirits into tiny little balls so as to be safe. Safe?! >From what? Life is always on the edge of death; narrow streets lead to the same place as wide avenues, and a little candle burns itself out just like a flaming torch does. =A0 =A0I choose my own way to burn.=94 =A0 =A0Sophie Scholl