Re: first step of ix(4) without kernel lock

2015-09-10 Thread Claudio Jeker
On Wed, Sep 09, 2015 at 11:57:57PM +0200, Hrvoje Popovski wrote: > On 9.9.2015. 10:10, Claudio Jeker wrote: > > This is a port of the em(4) IPL_MPSAFE changes made by kettenis@ to ix(4). > > Seems to work for me but don't expect any miracles. > > > > Please test > > > > Hi, > > i am testing

Re: first step of ix(4) without kernel lock

2015-09-10 Thread Hrvoje Popovski
On 10.9.2015. 9:47, Peter Hessler wrote: > On 2015 Sep 09 (Wed) at 23:57:57 +0200 (+0200), Hrvoje Popovski wrote: > :On 9.9.2015. 10:10, Claudio Jeker wrote: > :> This is a port of the em(4) IPL_MPSAFE changes made by kettenis@ to ix(4). > :> Seems to work for me but don't expect any miracles. >

Re: first step of ix(4) without kernel lock

2015-09-10 Thread Peter Hessler
On 2015 Sep 09 (Wed) at 23:57:57 +0200 (+0200), Hrvoje Popovski wrote: :On 9.9.2015. 10:10, Claudio Jeker wrote: :> This is a port of the em(4) IPL_MPSAFE changes made by kettenis@ to ix(4). :> Seems to work for me but don't expect any miracles. :> :> Please test :> : :Hi, : :i am testing your

Re: first step of ix(4) without kernel lock

2015-09-10 Thread Hrvoje Popovski
On 10.9.2015. 9:57, Claudio Jeker wrote: > There are still some issues with this first version. Here a 2nd version > that pushes the kernel lock even a bit further and tries to solve some of > the problems between the interrupt handler and the ioctl code. > There is still something not fully right

Re: first step of ix(4) without kernel lock

2015-09-10 Thread Hrvoje Popovski
On 10.9.2015. 9:57, Claudio Jeker wrote: > On Wed, Sep 09, 2015 at 11:57:57PM +0200, Hrvoje Popovski wrote: >> On 9.9.2015. 10:10, Claudio Jeker wrote: >>> This is a port of the em(4) IPL_MPSAFE changes made by kettenis@ to ix(4). >>> Seems to work for me but don't expect any miracles. >>> >>>

Re: first step of ix(4) without kernel lock

2015-09-10 Thread Claudio Jeker
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 12:11:07AM +0200, Hrvoje Popovski wrote: > On 10.9.2015. 17:02, Hrvoje Popovski wrote: > > On 10.9.2015. 9:57, Claudio Jeker wrote: > >> On Wed, Sep 09, 2015 at 11:57:57PM +0200, Hrvoje Popovski wrote: > >>> On 9.9.2015. 10:10, Claudio Jeker wrote: > This is a port of

Re: first step of ix(4) without kernel lock

2015-09-10 Thread Hrvoje Popovski
On 10.9.2015. 17:02, Hrvoje Popovski wrote: > On 10.9.2015. 9:57, Claudio Jeker wrote: >> On Wed, Sep 09, 2015 at 11:57:57PM +0200, Hrvoje Popovski wrote: >>> On 9.9.2015. 10:10, Claudio Jeker wrote: This is a port of the em(4) IPL_MPSAFE changes made by kettenis@ to ix(4). Seems to work

Re: first step of ix(4) without kernel lock

2015-09-09 Thread Hrvoje Popovski
On 9.9.2015. 10:10, Claudio Jeker wrote: > This is a port of the em(4) IPL_MPSAFE changes made by kettenis@ to ix(4). > Seems to work for me but don't expect any miracles. > > Please test > Hi, i am testing your patch with bridged and routed setup and everything works nice. ix card is dual