Hi,
One more thing.
http://www.netbsd.org/~ozaki-r/wm-split-mutex.diff
This patch splits the mutex of wm into two: one for
tx and the other for rx. By doing so, lock contentions
can be reduced. We lock both for other operations
that need locking, e.g., init, stop and ioctl.
I didn't do it
No comment or objection? Then, I'll commit the patch tomorrow.
ozaki-r
On Wed, Jul 9, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Ryota Ozaki ozak...@iij.ad.jp wrote:
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Ryota Ozaki ozak...@iij.ad.jp wrote:
Hi,
A new patch has come: http://www.netbsd.org/~ozaki-r/mpsafe-bridge.diff
I
On Tue, Jul 8, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Ryota Ozaki ozak...@iij.ad.jp wrote:
Hi,
A new patch has come: http://www.netbsd.org/~ozaki-r/mpsafe-bridge.diff
I confirmed the patch doesn't add new failures
in both NET_MPSAFE and non-NET_MPSAFE cases.
ozaki-r
The patch makes bridge forwarding MPSAFE.
Hi,
A new patch has come: http://www.netbsd.org/~ozaki-r/mpsafe-bridge.diff
The patch makes bridge forwarding MPSAFE. As same as wm,
it introduces BRIDGE_MPSAFE to switch MPSAFE and non-MPSAFE
codes. However, in the case of bridge, some locking codes
are always enabled to reduce ifdef switches.
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 4:09 PM, Ryota Ozaki ozak...@iij.ad.jp wrote:
Hi,
http://www.netbsd.org/~ozaki-r/mpsafe-ifq-wm.diff
I've updated the patch. The changes include:
- Make callouts MPSAFE
- Reduce splnet as much as possible
- Make ifconfig up/down work correctly under load
if_wm is
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 5:20 PM, Ryota Ozaki ozak...@iij.ad.jp wrote:
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 10:06 PM, Ryota Ozaki ozak...@iij.ad.jp wrote:
Hi Darren,
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:16 PM, Darren Reed darr...@netbsd.org wrote:
I assume this to be related to what rmind is doing, yes?
Yes and no.
Hi,
http://www.netbsd.org/~ozaki-r/mpsafe-ifq-wm.diff
I've updated the patch. The changes include:
- Make callouts MPSAFE
- Reduce splnet as much as possible
- Make ifconfig up/down work correctly under load
if_wm is now MPSAFEd as much as possible at this point.
Thanks,
ozaki-r
On Jun 21, 2014, at 9:48 PM, Darren Reed darr...@netbsd.org wrote:
On 22/06/2014 8:13 AM, Matt Thomas wrote:
On Jun 21, 2014, at 4:56 AM, Darren Reed darr...@netbsd.org wrote:
On 21/06/2014 11:00 AM, Matt Thomas wrote:
On Jun 20, 2014, at 5:57 AM, Ryota Ozaki ozak...@iij.ad.jp wrote:
Hi,
On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 7:14 AM, Matt Thomas m...@3am-software.com wrote:
On Jun 21, 2014, at 5:56 AM, Ryota Ozaki ozak...@iij.ad.jp wrote:
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Matt Thomas m...@3am-software.com wrote:
On Jun 20, 2014, at 5:57 AM, Ryota Ozaki ozak...@iij.ad.jp wrote:
Hi,
On 21/06/2014 11:00 AM, Matt Thomas wrote:
On Jun 20, 2014, at 5:57 AM, Ryota Ozaki ozak...@iij.ad.jp wrote:
Hi,
I've prepared a trial patch of MPSAFE networking.
http://www.netbsd.org/~ozaki-r/mpsafe-wm.diff
The kmutex_t in ifqueue, etc. should be pointers and not in the structure
On Sat, Jun 21, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Matt Thomas m...@3am-software.com wrote:
On Jun 20, 2014, at 5:57 AM, Ryota Ozaki ozak...@iij.ad.jp wrote:
Hi,
I've prepared a trial patch of MPSAFE networking.
http://www.netbsd.org/~ozaki-r/mpsafe-wm.diff
The kmutex_t in ifqueue, etc. should
On 22/06/2014 8:13 AM, Matt Thomas wrote:
On Jun 21, 2014, at 4:56 AM, Darren Reed darr...@netbsd.org wrote:
On 21/06/2014 11:00 AM, Matt Thomas wrote:
On Jun 20, 2014, at 5:57 AM, Ryota Ozaki ozak...@iij.ad.jp wrote:
Hi,
I've prepared a trial patch of MPSAFE networking.
On Jun 20, 2014, at 5:57 AM, Ryota Ozaki ozak...@iij.ad.jp wrote:
Hi,
I've prepared a trial patch of MPSAFE networking.
http://www.netbsd.org/~ozaki-r/mpsafe-wm.diff
The kmutex_t in ifqueue, etc. should be pointers and not in the structure
themselves.
That can simply the macros to
I assume this to be related to what rmind is doing, yes?
Is there a projects page that outlines the approach, etc?
This URL:
https://github.com/ozaki-r/netbsd-src/tree/experimental/mpsafe-bridge-wm-vioif
isn't really very useful in a web browser. Do you have one that is?
Darren
Hi Darren,
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:16 PM, Darren Reed darr...@netbsd.org wrote:
I assume this to be related to what rmind is doing, yes?
Yes and no. We have a same goal (networking parallelism), but we're
working on different components; he is mainly at L3 and above, and
we are below L3. We
On 3/06/2014 11:06 PM, Ryota Ozaki wrote:
Hi Darren,
On Tue, Jun 3, 2014 at 9:16 PM, Darren Reed darr...@netbsd.org wrote:
I assume this to be related to what rmind is doing, yes?
Yes and no. We have a same goal (networking parallelism), but we're
working on different components; he is mainly
16 matches
Mail list logo
