On 17-11-2014 12:02, Warner Losh wrote:
> On Nov 17, 2014, at 12:46 AM, Craig Rodrigues <rodr...@freebsd.org>
>> PROPOSAL ========== I would like to get feedback on the following
>> proposal. In the head branch (CURRENT), I would like to enable
>> VIMAGE with this commit:
>> PATCH ======
>> Index: sys/conf/NOTES
--- sys/conf/NOTES (revision 274300)
>> +++ sys/conf/NOTES (working copy) @@ -784,8 +784,8 @@ device
>> mn # Munich32x/Falc54 Nx64kbit/sec cards.
>> # Network stack virtualization. -#options VIMAGE -#options
>> VNET_DEBUG # debug for VIMAGE +options VIMAGE +options
>> VNET_DEBUG # debug for VIMAGE
>> # # Network interfaces:
>> I would like to enable VIMAGE for the following reasons:
>> REASONS ========
>> (1) VIMAGE cannot be enabled off to the side in a separate library
>> or kernel module. When enabled, it is a kernel ABI incompatible
>> change. This has impact on 3rd party code such as the kernel
>> modules which come with VirtualBox. So the time to do it in CURRENT
>> is now, otherwise we can't consider doing it until FreeBSD-12
>> timeframe, which is quite a while away.
>> (2) VIMAGE is used in some 3rd party products, such as FreeNAS.
>> These 3rd party products are mostly happy with VIMAGE, but
>> sometimes they encounter problems, and FreeBSD doesn't see these
>> problems because it is disabled by default.
>> (3) Most of the major subsystems like ipfw and pf have been fixed
>> for VIMAGE, and the only way to shake out the last few issues is to
>> make it the default and get feedback from the community. ipfilter
>> still needs to be VIMAGE-ified.
>> (4) Not everyone uses bhyve. FreeBSD jails are an excellent
>> virtualization platform for FreeBSD. Jails are still very popular
>> and performant. VIMAGE makes jails even better by allowing
>> per-jail network stacks.
>> (5) Olivier Cochard-Labbe has provided good network performance
>> results in VIMAGE vs. non-VIMAGE kernels:
(6) Certain people like Vitaly "wishmaster" <artem...@ukr.net> have been
>> running VIMAGE jails in a production environment for quite a while,
>> and would like to see it be the default.
>> ACTION PLAN ===========
>> (1) Coordinate/communicate with portmgr, since this has kernel
>> ABI implications
>> (2) Work with clusteradm@, and try to get a test instance of one
>> of the PF firewalls in the cluster working with a VIMAGE enabled
>> (3) Take a pass through http://wiki.freebsd.org/VIMAGE/TODO and
and try to clean things up. Get help from net@ developers to do
> And if these don’t get cleaned up?
>> (4) Take a pass on trying to VIMAGE-ify ipfilter. I'll need help
>> from the ipfilter maintainers for this and some net@ developers.
> And if this doesn’t happen?
>> (5) Enable VIMAGE by default in CURRENT on January 5, 2015. This
>> will *not* be enabled in STABLE.
>> What do people think?
> How do you plan to address the problems seen by FreeNAS in #2 above?
> I don’t see that in the action plan. Without it, we’re enabling an
> option that has know, serious issue making 11 potentially a more
> unstable release.
I think I understand your critique, but then on the other hand I wonder
where the reluctance is.... As I read it, things are going to be enabled
in CURRENT only (for the time). Which is exactly for the reasons you
worry about: Is it going to be reliable enough??
But for that it needs exposure... So I would expect it to be turned off
as a default IF things are not in a stable state that warrants a default
enabling of the options.
Things need to move forward, and taking this step is going to be
required.. Otherwise I see a big risk of bit-rot somewhere down in the
email@example.com mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to