I assume that it is going to be part of 9.1-RELEASE?
Please clarify.
On Wed, Aug 29, 2012 at 7:01 PM, Lowell Gilbert
freebsd-questions-lo...@be-well.ilk.org wrote:
Venkat Duvvuru venkatduvvuru...@gmail.com writes:
If a driver module misses the deadline to make it inbox , I think that
it's
Does this procedure hold good for a device driver module's patch as well?
On Thu, Sep 6, 2012 at 3:40 PM, Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com wrote:
Venkat Duvvuru wrote:
Hi,
Could somebody please point me to a procedure to apply a patch to the
sources?
I have a driver patch that I would
Hi,
Could somebody please point me to a procedure to apply a patch to the
sources?
I have a driver patch that I would like to commit.
/Venkat
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To
Hi,
I'm trying to insert vlan tag into the packet using ether_vlanencap but
the packet is getting corrupted in the mbuf and m_len is also showing a
wrong length.
Am I doing something wrong here? Can I directly pass mbuf pointer and vlan
tag to this api for inserting the vlan tag?
/Venkat
Hi,
How to mmap PCI BARs from userland in freebsd?
In Linux the PCI BAR appears as a file in the sysfs file system. How can I
access PCI BAR as a file in freebsd to mmap it?
/Venkat
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
reinstalling the sources fixed the problem. Thanks.
/Venkat
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 5:49 PM, Damien Fleuriot m...@my.gd wrote:
On 7/26/12 2:08 PM, Venkat Duvvuru wrote:
Hi,
Please find my repsonses in line.
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Damien Fleuriot m...@my.gd
mailto:m
Hi,
I'm unable to compile the kernel code (for that matter any kernel module
also). The following is the error.
My guess is that it is trying to compile the code for x86 instead of amd64
as you can a symbolic link create for x86 includes.
Please suggest the change to be done inorder to compile it
Hi,
Please find my repsonses in line.
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 4:57 PM, Damien Fleuriot m...@my.gd wrote:
On 7/26/12 12:48 PM, Venkat Duvvuru wrote:
Hi,
I'm unable to compile the kernel code (for that matter any kernel module
also). The following is the error.
My guess
Hi,
MSI-x supports upto 2048 vectors but what I see in freebsd 8.2 is that when
I use more than ~30 vectors, system becomes dead slow.
Is there a limitation on number of msi vectors that can be used in 8.2?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Folks - Any inputs on this?
for reference
http://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/powerpc/eeh-pci-error-recovery.txt
/Venkat
On Sun, May 20, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Venkat Duvvuru
venkatduvvuru...@gmail.comwrote:
Linux has a feature called EEH (extended error handling) which is
introduced to handle
Folks,
Can somebody please explain me why tcp checsum calculation is mandated in
the freebsd network stack (tcp_input---in6_cksum) albeit the card supports
it?
Probably Steve is the right person who can answer this.
/Venkat
On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 11:27 AM, Venkat Duvvuru venkatduvvuru
Folks,
Could somebody please tell about the base Freebsd version which has LRO
support for IPv6?
I'm using 9.0-RELEASE and I see that tcp_lro_rx is failing.
Please confirm.
/Venkat
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Thanks for the response.
I observed that there is a significant performance drop in case of IPv6 on
the rx side.
While I'm able to hit line rate ~9.5 Gbps on a 10gb NIC for IPv4..I could
only get ~6 Gbps on the rx front for IPv6...However tx for IPv6 is on
par with IPv4 hitting almost line rates.
:16 PM, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote:
LRO is a huge win for 10G (as is TSO on the TX side), so odds are good its
behind the drop,
in any case you'll be able to test that soon :)
Jack
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 10:35 AM, Venkat Duvvuru
venkatduvvuru...@gmail.com wrote:
Thanks
Linux has a feature called EEH (extended error handling) which is
introduced to handle PCI errors gracefully.
Is EEH supported in freebsd as well?
I looked into the documentation of freebsd and briefly looked into the
freebsd source tree as well but couldn't find anything like that.
Please
Folks,
This question is related to the hash calculation done as part of selecting
the transmit queue for IPv6 traffic.
I observed that no matter how many queues you use in the driver, the tx
traffic is always coming on queue 0.
Did anybody else observed this behaviour? and is that how it is in
16 matches
Mail list logo