Henning Brauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > int mitigation has always made quite some difference, but now it is even > more, I agree. >
I could never see a difference on Soekris boxes with a 400 us delay in if_sis in earlier OpenBSD versions. But I never tried higher delays than that. > nontheless sis is not far up from rl. far away from the real ones. > I'd love to believe you, but tell me what you base this assertion on. Is this with real world comparisons of the same hardware running sis and rl (and a "real" chip like fxp...) ? if_rl does m_copydata() and bzero() all the time, where if_sis does not have to. The equivalent routine in if_sis (sis_encap) is about half the size. The whole sis driver is very simple and doesn't appear to do anything outrageous to support the chip. Is the bzero call where if_rl pads the frames in rl_encap a candidate to move to memset which gcc can better optimize? Hmm, it's only called for small packets that need to be padded to the minimum size for if_rl. > > One thing vr doesn't support is an interrupt hold off > > which disqualifies it for any serious routing tasks. > There may be another way to do this with if_vr.
