Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2003 09:16:45 +0800 From: "Michael Shiu" <mshiu@net-yan.com> To: "Vincent Jardin" <vjardin@wanadoo.fr>, "Julian Elischer" <julian@elischer.org> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Does Netgraph in FBSD 5.x SMP requires GIANT lock? Message-ID: <014901c32bc9$4c7a9a30$650019ac@athena> References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0306050436070.80038-100000@InterJet.elischer.org> <200306052213.35422.vjardin@wanadoo.fr>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I am using DEVICE_POLLING by Lugzi Rizzo and connecting 2 em devices using NG_ETHER with NG_BRIDGE. Actually, I am planning to make a netgraph node to do some filtering but as a performance prototype, I am getting those results mentioned. i.e. em0 - NG_ETHER - NG_BRIDGE - NG_ETHER - em1 The polling code currently does not work in SMP environments but with some patchwork, I probably can make it work. But I am not clear if the netgraph framework has other limitations. rgds, _Michael ----- Original Message ----- From: "Vincent Jardin" <vjardin@wanadoo.fr> To: "Julian Elischer" <julian@elischer.org>; "Michael Shiu" <mshiu@net-yan.com> Cc: <freebsd-net@freebsd.org> Sent: Friday, June 06, 2003 4:13 AM Subject: Re: Does Netgraph in FBSD 5.x SMP requires GIANT lock? Maybe one giant2thread node could be introduced into the graphs. It could put the messages and the mbufs into a queue from a giant context, then they could be processed from a thread. Is it a possible architecture or do I forget something ? Regards, Vincent Le Jeudi 5 Juin 2003 13:38, Julian Elischer a écrit : > On Thu, 5 Jun 2003, Michael Shiu wrote: > > Dear all, > > > > Just like to know if the netgraph code running 5.x SMP kernel requires > > the GIANT lock? > > Netgraph has lovking built into it but I have not > had teh time yet to "thrown the switch" and run it without > giant. (actually it would only have giant if the edge node that > introduces the packet has giant, or if it's running > as a net thread.) > > What is your graph like? > > > I have the netgraph doing bridging right now but the performance is > > limited by the CPU (right now, it is something around 100k pkt/s in > > 4-STABLE). Does adding another CPU together with upgrading to 5.x be of > > any help? I guess the bottleneck right now is only one thread is > > executing in interrupt context with GIANT being held. Am I right? > > > > _Michael > > > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?014901c32bc9$4c7a9a30$650019ac>