On Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 8:13:25 PM UTC-4, Charles Myers wrote: > > We have automated tests for our application running on OSv which uses TCP > and UDP, but not separately for OSv. > > I tested with iperf as well but this wasn’t automated. > > > > Yeah, TCP/IP stack issues like the one you referenced are very difficult > to track down. Something like that would take me a long time too. > > The OSv network code is a fairly direct port from the FreeBSD network code > aside from net channel and route table caching. > > So probably best reference would be documentation for FreeBSD, but I do > not know of any good freely available FreeBSD network documentation. > > > > My patch set already has #ifdefs for IPv6 with it enabled by default. > > The FreeBSD stack originally also had #ifdefs for IPv4, but it looked like > some of them were removed with the port to OSv > > so they would need to get added back. Probably should not be too > difficult, but might make the code more complicated. > > FreeBSD doesn’t have #ifdefs for TCP and UDP but it would not be too hard > to add them. But I guess you would > > probably want to consider what type of small footprint apps would not want > TCP and/or UDP and if it is worth modifying the > > OSv tooling to work without TCP. UDP is a pretty simple protocol so > shouldn’t take too much space and most apps would want TCP, > > so not sure if those would be worth doing those. > I am not surprised by your opinion and indeed there are very few apps that would NOT need networking. However there is sizable class (if not most) of business apps with REST/over HTTP that do not need UDP. But given UDP is so simple there is probably no benefit of making it optional. Overall I suspected networking stack in OSv to be the last candidate to become modular for all these reasons. But I wanted to hear someone else's opinion.
> > > Might be other network stuff which could be #ifdef out, but to be honest > the OSv memory footprint has been fine for our application usage > > so I haven’t really looked at this. > If you have any other ideas of what and possibly improve OSv please let me know. > > > -Charles > > > > > > *From:* [email protected] <javascript:> <[email protected] > <javascript:>> *On Behalf Of *Waldek Kozaczuk > *Sent:* Tuesday, October 2, 2018 12:08 PM > *To:* OSv Development <[email protected] <javascript:>> > *Subject:* Re: [PATCH 00/16] OSv IPv6 support > > > > Charles, > > > > I hate to jump in so late in the game but I was wondering about 2 things > that relate to this patches: > > 1. Do you happen to have any automated tests that test OSv networking > stack beyond what the unit tests do? Have you by any chance created any > documentation about OSv networking implementation? I myself have very > little understanding of it and it took me a while for example to fix this > issue - > https://github.com/cloudius-systems/osv/issues/859#issuecomment-384636059 > . > 2. I am thinking of improvements to OSv that might be part of next > 0.53 release (I am planning to cut 0.52 soon). The overall theme, I was > going to propose, would be make OSv lighter in terms of memory usage that > is also heavily influenced by kernel size (right now around 10MB). > Therefore I was wondering what your thoughts are about possibly > modularizing networking stack in OSv into tcp, udp, IPV4, IPV6, etc using > #ifdef-s (I know that some of these would overlap so what I am proposing > may not make much sense especially given how little I know about > networking). I am guessing that data structures would be difficult to > break > like this but code might be easier. Anyway just food for thought. > > Thanks in advance for your answers, > > Waldek > > > On Monday, September 10, 2018 at 7:19:11 PM UTC-4, Charles Myers wrote: > > Sorry for delay. A lot of things came up and I finally have some time now > to work on addressing the comments in your review. > > > > The IPv6 patch set is kind of large and posting it multiple times will be > a bit painful for everyone, so I will provide a link to a github branch > with the changes as you suggested in a day or so. > > > > Thanks, > > Charles > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "OSv Development" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected] <javascript:>. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OSv Development" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
