On 13/08/15(Thu) 16:43, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > From: "Ted Unangst" <t...@tedunangst.com> > > Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2015 10:04:55 -0400 > > > > Martin Pieuchot wrote: > > > > > > How many sparc64 come with em(4)? Can we assume that the amount of > > > wasted memory on such system is acceptable? What about other strict- > > > alignment architectures? > > > > just(? mostly?) t5120. mine has 32gb in it. it is, or could be, a popular > > openbsd machine. it's also new enough it's almost certainly got memory to > > spare, even if you only have 8gb or so. (it does have 4 em, btw.) > > The oldest sparc64 machine to ship with onboard em(4) was the t2k, > which really isn't such a memory starved machine either. > > Regarding other strict-alignment architectures, em(4) is probably one > of the more popular gigabit ethernet options for those architectures > that have PCI slots. I don't think any of these machines are severely > memory starved, but memory might be limited to something like 256MB of > physical memory. > > Since we don't fully populate the em(4) rx rings, the memory > consumption of the mbufs on the rings isn't going to be very large on > interfaces that don't receive a lot of traffic. But I don't have a > good idea how likely it is for a lot of received mbufs to be queued up > in the network stack.
Then I'd say the best way to learn is to commit your diff :)
