What's the latest on fixing IFF_DRV_OACTIVE/if_start/etc?

[Jack Vogel]

So, you mean having them create their own buf ring I assume? Would be easy
enough to hack some code and try it if someone is so inclined?

Jack



On Mon, Sep 17, 2012 at 12:03 PM, John Baldwin <jhb at freebsd.org> wrote:

> On Monday, September 17, 2012 1:45:12 pm Adrian Chadd wrote:
> > On 17 September 2012 10:16, John Baldwin <jhb at freebsd.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I think for if_bridge the fix is that it no longer uses if_start. :)
> >
> > :)
> >
> > > For real hardware you will get some sort of TX completion interrupt
> that will
> > > restart the transmit queue.  Virtual software-only interfaces such as
> vlan(4)
> > > and if_bridge(4) don't have that luxury though, and the best bet for
> them is
> > > to probably have them use if_transmit instead.  vlan(4) and
> if_bridge(4) are
> > > already fixed for that (if_bridge was only fixed a week or so ago in
> HEAD).
> >
> > I'm still not convinced that going the if_start route (with
> > process-to-completion) is going to work well when forwarding gobs of
> > packets on anything bar ${BIG_IRON}, but that aside..
>
> Eh?  For virtual interfaces, if_transmit introduces less overhead than
> using if_start (no locking, queueing, dequeueing, etc.).  I expect that
> to be a net win for smaller boards.
>
> > It may be nice to introduce a virtual TX completion callback? Ie, a
> > child driver could signal that it's successfully drained its TX queue,
> > notifying any parent drivers that they can send more?
>
> That could work, but I generally think if_transmit is a better route for
> these sorts of things.  That turns these interfaces into simple filters
> rather than building up their own queue, etc.
>
> --
> John Baldwin
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-net at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>