Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 05:05:41PM +0200, Volodymyr Kostyrko wrote:
Jeremy Chadwick wrote:
I want to note here: the pf ALTQ options are a pain in the butt, quite
honestly. I've found in the past that removing the ones you don't use
won't result in a successful build, thus one must include them all. We
do need ALTQ support though, for rate-limiting capability. The NOPCC
option is needed for SMP builds, which makes me wonder what the state of
SMP is in this regard -- meaning, on non-SMP builds, is it still safe
to include ALTQ_NOPCC?
It seems like I'm missing something. What is good about using
non-SMP kernel?
Nothing. It's a question of whether or not use of ALTQ_NOPCC causes
breakage on non-SMP kernels, or if FreeBSD even bothers to support
non-SMP at this point. "Non-SMP" means "without options SMP".
You got my point. I'm a single core user today but I run SMP-enabled kernel.
Rephrased: if SMP is the default, and "options SMP" works just fine on
systems without multiple processors/cores, then the ALTQ_NOPCC option
should probably be removed.
Yep, works for me. However I had found some cruft about extra processing
power which would be used in expense of correct work. Can this be
something like IPFIREWALL_FORWARD that adds some latency to most cases
providing some use only for chosen ones?
--
Sphinx of black quartz judge my vow.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-stable-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
