TB --- 2012-04-20 03:30:01 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-20 03:30:01 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
TB --- 2012-04-20 03:30:01 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-20 03:30:01 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 12:37:21AM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> On 20.04.2012 00:03, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> >On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:20:00PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> >>On 19.04.2012 22:46, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> >>>The allocation happens while the code has already an exclusive
> >>>lock on
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 08:17:55PM -0700, Kevin Oberman wrote:
>
> Minor note. Sound card seems to work OK through the speakers, but I
> have failed to find the magic to make the headphone jack work.
This is the same for my x200, but you can make it work:
On 9.0-RELEASE you have to configure thr
on 20/04/2012 06:43 Erich Dollansky said the following:
> Hi,
>
> On Friday 20 April 2012 10:17:55 Kevin Oberman wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 6:25 PM, Erich Dollansky
>> wrote:
>>
>> Minor note. Sound card seems to work OK through the speakers, but I
>> have failed to find the magic to make
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 8:43 PM, Erich Dollansky
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Friday 20 April 2012 10:17:55 Kevin Oberman wrote:
>> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 6:25 PM, Erich Dollansky
>> wrote:
>>
>> Minor note. Sound card seems to work OK through the speakers, but I
>> have failed to find the magic to make
Hi,
On Friday 20 April 2012 10:17:55 Kevin Oberman wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 6:25 PM, Erich Dollansky
> wrote:
>
> Minor note. Sound card seems to work OK through the speakers, but I
> have failed to find the magic to make the headphone jack work. I have
> not tried very hard, either. I k
TB --- 2012-04-20 00:26:09 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-20 00:26:09 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 6:25 PM, Erich Dollansky
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> thanks for the answer.
>
> More inside the e-mail.
>
> On Friday 20 April 2012 07:31:51 matt wrote:
>> On 04/19/12 17:01, Erich Dollansky wrote:
>> >
>> > there are so many different news about the X220 here that it is not so
>> >
TB --- 2012-04-20 01:08:45 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-20 01:08:45 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
TB --- 2012-04-19 23:53:19 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 23:53:19 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
Hi,
thanks for the answer.
More inside the e-mail.
On Friday 20 April 2012 07:31:51 matt wrote:
> On 04/19/12 17:01, Erich Dollansky wrote:
> >
> > there are so many different news about the X220 here that it is not so
> > clear to me whether an install will result in a usable system.
> >
> >
>
TB --- 2012-04-19 23:07:55 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 23:07:55 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
laptop:root[227] uname -a
FreeBSD laptop 10.0-CURRENT FreeBSD 10.0-CURRENT #0 r230975M: Sat Feb 4
09:03:27 PST 2012 root@laptop:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/MOBILE i386
laptop:root[224] config MOBILE
Kernel build directory is ../compile/MOBILE
Don't forget to do ``make cleandepend && make depend''
Andrey Simonenko wrote:
> On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 04:56:02PM -0400, Rick Macklem wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have patches for the mountd, rpc.statd and rpc.lockd daemons
> > that are meant to keep them from failing when a dynamically
> > selected port# is not available for some combination of
> > ud
On 04/19/12 17:01, Erich Dollansky wrote:
Hi,
there are so many different news about the X220 here that it is not so clear to
me whether an install will result in a usable system.
If everything works fine, there should be one for me tomorrow ready to get
FreeBSD. My plan is to start with a pl
TB --- 2012-04-19 20:50:00 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 20:50:00 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
Hi,
there are so many different news about the X220 here that it is not so clear to
me whether an install will result in a usable system.
If everything works fine, there should be one for me tomorrow ready to get
FreeBSD. My plan is to start with a plain 9.0 installation and upgrade it then
to
TB --- 2012-04-19 20:50:00 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 20:50:00 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
TB --- 2012-04-19 20:50:00 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 20:50:00 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
On 20.04.2012 00:03, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:20:00PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
On 19.04.2012 22:46, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
The allocation happens while the code has already an exclusive
lock on so->snd_buf so a pool of fresh buffers could be attached
there.
Ah, there it
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:20:00PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> On 19.04.2012 22:46, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
...
> >What might be moderately expensive are the critical_enter()/critical_exit()
> >calls around individual allocations.
>
> Can't get away from those as a thread must not migrate away
> wh
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:27 PM, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> On 19.04.2012 23:17, K. Macy wrote:
This only helps if your flows aren't hitting the same rtentry.
Otherwise you still convoy on the lock for the rtentry itself to
increment and decrement the rtentry's reference count.
>
> Yes, but the lookup requires a lock? Or is every entry replicated
> to every CPU? So a number of concurrent CPU's sending to the same
> UDP destination would content on that lock?
No. In the default case it's per CPU, thus no serialization is
required. But yes, if your transmitting thread ma
On 19.04.2012 23:17, K. Macy wrote:
This only helps if your flows aren't hitting the same rtentry.
Otherwise you still convoy on the lock for the rtentry itself to
increment and decrement the rtentry's reference count.
The rtentry lock isn't obtained anymore. While the rmlock read
lock is hel
On 19.04.2012 22:46, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 10:05:37PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
On 19.04.2012 15:30, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
I have been running some performance tests on UDP sockets,
using the netsend program in tools/tools/netrate/netsend
and instrumenting the source code
>> This only helps if your flows aren't hitting the same rtentry.
>> Otherwise you still convoy on the lock for the rtentry itself to
>> increment and decrement the rtentry's reference count.
>
>
> The rtentry lock isn't obtained anymore. While the rmlock read
> lock is held on the rtable the rele
On 19.04.2012 22:34, K. Macy wrote:
This is indeed a big problem. I'm working (rough edges remain) on
changing the routing table locking to an rmlock (read-mostly) which
This only helps if your flows aren't hitting the same rtentry.
Otherwise you still convoy on the lock for the rtentry itse
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 11:22 PM, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 10:34:45PM +0200, K. Macy wrote:
>> >> This is indeed a big problem. ?I'm working (rough edges remain) on
>> >> changing the routing table locking to an rmlock (read-mostly) which
>> >
>>
>> This only helps if your flow
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 10:34:45PM +0200, K. Macy wrote:
> >> This is indeed a big problem. ?I'm working (rough edges remain) on
> >> changing the routing table locking to an rmlock (read-mostly) which
> >
>
> This only helps if your flows aren't hitting the same rtentry.
> Otherwise you still con
TB --- 2012-04-19 17:45:35 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 17:45:35 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
>> This is indeed a big problem. I'm working (rough edges remain) on
>> changing the routing table locking to an rmlock (read-mostly) which
>
This only helps if your flows aren't hitting the same rtentry.
Otherwise you still convoy on the lock for the rtentry itself to
increment and decrement the
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 10:05:37PM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote:
> On 19.04.2012 15:30, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> >I have been running some performance tests on UDP sockets,
> >using the netsend program in tools/tools/netrate/netsend
> >and instrumenting the source code and the kernel do return in
> >va
On 19.04.2012 15:30, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
I have been running some performance tests on UDP sockets,
using the netsend program in tools/tools/netrate/netsend
and instrumenting the source code and the kernel do return in
various points of the path. Here are some results which
I hope you find interes
TB --- 2012-04-19 18:26:13 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 18:26:13 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
TB --- 2012-04-19 17:13:11 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 17:13:11 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 03:30:18PM +0200, Luigi Rizzo wrote:
> I have been running some performance tests on UDP sockets,
> using the netsend program in tools/tools/netrate/netsend
> and instrumenting the source code and the kernel do return in
> various points of the path. Here are some results w
TB --- 2012-04-19 16:26:07 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 16:26:07 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
TB --- 2012-04-19 14:10:00 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 14:10:00 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
TB --- 2012-04-19 14:10:00 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 14:10:00 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
TB --- 2012-04-19 14:10:00 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 14:10:00 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
TB --- 2012-04-19 11:06:19 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 11:06:19 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
TB --- 2012-04-19 11:49:37 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 11:49:37 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
I have been running some performance tests on UDP sockets,
using the netsend program in tools/tools/netrate/netsend
and instrumenting the source code and the kernel do return in
various points of the path. Here are some results which
I hope you find interesting.
Test conditions:
- intel i7-870 CPU
TB --- 2012-04-19 10:33:40 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 10:33:40 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
On Mon, May 30, 2011 at 04:56:02PM -0400, Rick Macklem wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have patches for the mountd, rpc.statd and rpc.lockd daemons
> that are meant to keep them from failing when a dynamically
> selected port# is not available for some combination of
> udp,tcp X ipv4,ipv6
>
> If anyone woul
TB --- 2012-04-19 09:47:03 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 09:47:03 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
TB --- 2012-04-19 07:30:00 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 07:30:00 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
TB --- 2012-04-19 07:30:00 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 07:30:00 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
TB --- 2012-04-19 07:30:00 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 07:30:00 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
TB --- 2012-04-19 04:25:11 - tinderbox 2.9 running on freebsd-current.sentex.ca
TB --- 2012-04-19 04:25:11 - FreeBSD freebsd-current.sentex.ca 8.3-PRERELEASE
FreeBSD 8.3-PRERELEASE #0: Mon Mar 26 13:54:12 EDT 2012
d...@freebsd-current.sentex.ca:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/GENERIC amd64
TB --- 2012-
51 matches
Mail list logo