Re: What's the status of parallel netisr?
Jian Qiu wrote: Hi, Kris, In our application-level tests FreeBSD significantly out-performs Linux, so either you have found a different workload, or something is not configured equally. One important thing I can think of off the top of my head is that Linux has a larger socket buffer size by default, so try tuning that on FreeBSD or confirm they are equal. If that still fails, can you provide test code? Kris I tried but larger socket buffer seem not helpful. I also tried netperf and iperf. Both applications achieve better throughput on Linux. So I feel the result is not specific to my test code. My code is very simple. Basically, a client process called sendto in a loop while a server called recvfrom in a loop. Besides these, some additional lines get the throughput statistics. If necessary, I will post the code here. BTW, I did the tests on Linux 2.26.5. Which linux kernel did you use? Could you please provide some more information on your test. The ones I have in mind were application level benchmarks of things like DNS and memcached. I tested on 2.6.25, which is perhaps what you meant to say too. Try to keep looking for other factors that might still be in play, like hardware or driver differences. Kris ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: [X-POST] Anyone porting NetworkManager to FreeBSD ?
I was thinking about porting it, because I really need this thing on my laptop and to have some programming experience. I just wanted to have a companion, because I'm not sure I can handle this by myself and because I'm pretty lazy these days, so I need to feel responsibility :) Anyone interested? 2008/9/21 Joe Marcus Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Sun, 2008-09-21 at 03:26 +0530, Ashish Shukla आशीष शुक्ल wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Is there anyone, who is porting NetworkManager[1] to FreeBSD ? If yes, I >> would like to be a tester or contributor to the effort. > > It's been on our ideas list for a while, and I think someone mentioned > they were working on it a few months ago (check the archives). I held a > desktop discussion at the last BSDCan, and Kris Moore of PC-BSD > suggested it may be easier to port their network manager > (http://svn.pcbsd.org/browser/pcbsd/trunk/NetworkManager) from KDE to > GTK+/GNOME > > In the meantime, I did a GNOME PBI for PC-BSD, and added hooks to make > use of some of PC-BSD's admin tools. The result was positive. However, > it would be great to have working GTK+/GNOME native tools. > > Joe > >> >> References: >> [1] - http://www.gnome.org/projects/NetworkManager/ >> >> Thanks >> Ashish Shukla > -- > PGP Key : http://www.marcuscom.com/pgp.asc > -- Best wishes, me. ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Backporting iwn(4): WPA auth hangs... Help!
Hi all, I'm attempting to backport the iwn(4) driver for the Intel 4965 driver from -HEAD to RELENG_7 and am getting stuck with it at one particular point: WPA authentication times out. I've so far tried to both take the -HEAD driver and de-vapify etc. it, and also to take a pre-vap version of the driver and bring in required changes. Both fail in exactly the same way, with authentication timing out. I have verified that the laptop can successfully connect to the same network with -HEAD and the same wpa_supplicant.conf file. I've attached the log file from wpa_supplicant. Code can be found at http://people.freebsd.org/~gavin/iwn/ - I'm currently working with the updated-from-pre-vap version so that's the one that generated the log file and is probably the best to look at. Sadly I don't have the infrastructure at the moment to test if the driver works with WEP. Any help or pointers would be greatfully received, Thanks! GavinInitializing interface 'iwn0' conf '/root/wpa_supplicant.conf' driver 'default' ctrl_interface 'N/A' bridge 'N/A' Configuration file '/root/wpa_supplicant.conf' -> '/root/wpa_supplicant.conf' Reading configuration file '/root/wpa_supplicant.conf' ctrl_interface='/var/run/wpa_supplicant' Priority group 0 id=0 ssid='sdkfjw' Initializing interface (2) 'iwn0' EAPOL: SUPP_PAE entering state DISCONNECTED EAPOL: KEY_RX entering state NO_KEY_RECEIVE EAPOL: SUPP_BE entering state INITIALIZE EAP: EAP entering state DISABLED EAPOL: External notification - portEnabled=0 EAPOL: External notification - portValid=0 Own MAC address: 00:1f:3b:24:ed:ed wpa_driver_bsd_set_wpa: enabled=1 wpa_driver_bsd_set_wpa_internal: wpa=3 privacy=1 wpa_driver_bsd_del_key: keyidx=0 wpa_driver_bsd_del_key: keyidx=1 wpa_driver_bsd_del_key: keyidx=2 wpa_driver_bsd_del_key: keyidx=3 wpa_driver_bsd_set_countermeasures: enabled=0 wpa_driver_bsd_set_drop_unencrypted: enabled=1 Setting scan request: 0 sec 10 usec Added interface iwn0 State: DISCONNECTED -> SCANNING Starting AP scan (specific SSID) Scan SSID - hexdump_ascii(len=6): 73 64 6b 66 6a 77 sdkfjw Trying to get current scan results first without requesting a new scan to speed up initial association Received 0 bytes of scan results (0 BSSes) Scan results: 0 Selecting BSS from priority group 0 Try to find WPA-enabled AP Try to find non-WPA AP No suitable AP found. Setting scan request: 0 sec 0 usec Starting AP scan (broadcast SSID) Received 0 bytes of scan results (3 BSSes) Scan results: 3 Selecting BSS from priority group 0 Try to find WPA-enabled AP 0: 00:19:4b:97:84:cd ssid='com77' wpa_ie_len=26 rsn_ie_len=0 caps=0x11 skip - SSID mismatch 1: 00:1f:33:7a:5f:be ssid='SKY04014' wpa_ie_len=26 rsn_ie_len=0 caps=0x71 skip - SSID mismatch 2: 00:13:49:c0:3c:e1 ssid='sdkfjw' wpa_ie_len=0 rsn_ie_len=22 caps=0x11 selected based on RSN IE selected WPA AP 00:13:49:c0:3c:e1 ssid='sdkfjw' Try to find non-WPA AP Trying to associate with 00:13:49:c0:3c:e1 (SSID='sdkfjw' freq=2472 MHz) Cancelling scan request WPA: clearing own WPA/RSN IE Automatic auth_alg selection: 0x1 wpa_driver_bsd_set_auth_alg alg 0x1 authmode 1 RSN: using IEEE 802.11i/D9.0 WPA: Selected cipher suites: group 16 pairwise 16 key_mgmt 2 proto 2 WPA: clearing AP WPA IE WPA: set AP RSN IE - hexdump(len=22): 30 14 01 00 00 0f ac 04 01 00 00 0f ac 04 01 00 00 0f ac 02 00 00 WPA: using GTK CCMP WPA: using PTK CCMP WPA: using KEY_MGMT WPA-PSK WPA: Set own WPA IE default - hexdump(len=22): 30 14 01 00 00 0f ac 04 01 00 00 0f ac 04 01 00 00 0f ac 02 00 00 No keys have been configured - skip key clearing wpa_driver_bsd_set_drop_unencrypted: enabled=1 State: SCANNING -> ASSOCIATING wpa_driver_bsd_associate: ssid 'sdkfjw' wpa ie len 22 pairwise 3 group 3 key mgmt 1 wpa_driver_bsd_associate: set PRIVACY 1 Setting authentication timeout: 10 sec 0 usec EAPOL: External notification - EAP success=0 EAPOL: External notification - EAP fail=0 EAPOL: External notification - portControl=Auto RSN: Ignored PMKID candidate without preauth flag Authentication with 00:13:49:c0:3c:e1 timed out. Added BSSID 00:13:49:c0:3c:e1 into blacklist No keys have been configured - skip key clearing State: ASSOCIATING -> DISCONNECTED EAPOL: External notification - portEnabled=0 EAPOL: External notification - portValid=0 EAPOL: External notification - EAP success=0 Setting scan request: 0 sec 0 usec State: DISCONNECTED -> SCANNING Starting AP scan (specific SSID) Scan SSID - hexdump_ascii(len=6): 73 64 6b 66 6a 77 sdkfjw Received 0 bytes of scan results (3 BSSes) Scan results: 3 Selecting BSS from priority group 0 Try to find WPA-enabled AP 0: 00:19:4b:97:84:cd ssid='com77' wpa_ie_len=26 rsn_ie_len=0 caps=0x11 skip - SSID mismatch 1: 00:1f:33:7a:5f:be ssid='SKY04014' wpa_ie_len=26 rsn_ie_len=0 caps=0x71 skip - SSID mismatch 2: 00:13:49:c0:3c:e1 ssid='sdkfjw' wpa_ie_len=0 rsn_ie_len=22 caps=0x11 selected based
Re: kern/127528: [icmp]: icmp socket receives icmp replies not owned by the process.
Old Synopsis: icmp socket receives icmp replies not owned by the process. New Synopsis: [icmp]: icmp socket receives icmp replies not owned by the process. Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-net Responsible-Changed-By: remko Responsible-Changed-When: Sun Sep 21 21:03:41 UTC 2008 Responsible-Changed-Why: Reassign to networking team http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=127528 ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Firewall redirect doesn't work any more...
Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote: ...or am I missing something? I've a box running: FreeBSD whiplash.wheel.pl 7.0-STABLE FreeBSD 7.0-STABLE #0: Wed Jul 23 11:41:31 CEST 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/WHIPLASH i386 I'm also running PF in there with the following rule: rdr on fxp0 proto tcp from 10.0.1.9 to 10.0.0.2 port 88 -> 10.0.5.123 port 88 When I connect from 10.0.1.9 to 10.0.0.2:88 I can see redirected packet leaving the box: IP 10.0.1.9.43210 > 10.0.0.2.88: S [...] IP 10.0.1.9.43210 > 10.0.5.123.88: S [...] Ok. Now I've a box running: FreeBSD bridge.wheel.pl 7.1-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 7.1-PRERELEASE #1: Thu Sep 11 13:59:06 CEST 2008 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/BRIDGE i386 And the following PF rule: rdr on fxp0 proto tcp from 10.0.0.2 to 10.0.5.123 port 88 -> 10.0.1.9 port 88 When I connect from 10.0.0.2 to 10.0.5.123:88 I no longer see redirected packet leaving the box: IP 10.0.0.2.60806 > 10.0.5.123.88: S [...] I tried to redirect packet on the second box with IPFW, but also failed (yes IPFIREWALL_FORWARD was compiled in). Does something got broken or am I missing some configuration hint? Could it be that the box you are trying to connect from is the 10.0.0.2? If this is the case, then the problem is that the rule rdr is works only for packet which hits the interface from outside, eq interface should be incoming for packets not outgoing on which the rule is set . rik ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Backporting iwn(4): WPA auth hangs... Help!
On 9/21/08, Gavin Atkinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'm attempting to backport the iwn(4) driver for the Intel 4965 driver > from -HEAD to RELENG_7 and am getting stuck with it at one particular > point: WPA authentication times out. > > I've so far tried to both take the -HEAD driver and de-vapify etc. it, and > also to take a pre-vap version of the driver and bring in required > changes. Both fail in exactly the same way, with authentication timing > out. I have verified that the laptop can successfully connect to the same > network with -HEAD and the same wpa_supplicant.conf file. I've attached > the log file from wpa_supplicant. Code can be found at > http://people.freebsd.org/~gavin/iwn/ - I'm currently working with the > updated-from-pre-vap version so that's the one that generated the log file > and is probably the best to look at. > > Sadly I don't have the infrastructure at the moment to test if the > driver works with WEP. > > Any help or pointers would be greatfully received, > > Thanks! > > Gavin I can't understand why is IEEE80211_C_STA removed in both versions. ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Backporting iwn(4): WPA auth hangs... Help!
Paul B. Mahol wrote: On 9/21/08, Gavin Atkinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hi all, I'm attempting to backport the iwn(4) driver for the Intel 4965 driver from -HEAD to RELENG_7 and am getting stuck with it at one particular point: WPA authentication times out. I've so far tried to both take the -HEAD driver and de-vapify etc. it, and also to take a pre-vap version of the driver and bring in required changes. Both fail in exactly the same way, with authentication timing out. I have verified that the laptop can successfully connect to the same network with -HEAD and the same wpa_supplicant.conf file. I've attached the log file from wpa_supplicant. Code can be found at http://people.freebsd.org/~gavin/iwn/ - I'm currently working with the updated-from-pre-vap version so that's the one that generated the log file and is probably the best to look at. Sadly I don't have the infrastructure at the moment to test if the driver works with WEP. Any help or pointers would be greatfully received, Thanks! Gavin I can't understand why is IEEE80211_C_STA removed in both versions. ___ There is no explicit STA capability in RELENG_7; it only exists in HEAD. Sam ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: kern/127528: [icmp]: icmp socket receives icmp replies not owned by the process.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Old Synopsis: icmp socket receives icmp replies not owned by the process. New Synopsis: [icmp]: icmp socket receives icmp replies not owned by the process. This PR is bogus because: ICMP has no concept of datagrams being "owned" by a process. There is no field in the ICMP protocol which differentiates ICMP "sessions" on a per-process basis, and this is because ICMP has no concept of "sessions" -- ICMP messages are directed at IP endpoints. The networking stack will only selectively dispatch ICMP traffic based on two conditions: 1. ip_proto number (raw sockets may selectively bind to a protocol) and 2. multicast group membership (not applicable in this instance). > It also shows that both echo requests have different identifiers in the id field which should keep the icmp streams seperated. There is absolutely no requirement for the kernel code to look at the ID field, beyond reporting it to consumers of the SOCK_RAW interface. This PR can be closed, the submitter should consult the pfSense maintainers. thanks BMS ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: kern/127528: [icmp]: icmp socket receives icmp replies not owned by the process.
The following reply was made to PR kern/127528; it has been noted by GNATS. From: "Bruce M. Simpson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: kern/127528: [icmp]: icmp socket receives icmp replies not owned by the process. Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 23:12:30 +0100 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Old Synopsis: icmp socket receives icmp replies not owned by the process. > New Synopsis: [icmp]: icmp socket receives icmp replies not owned by the > process. > This PR is bogus because: ICMP has no concept of datagrams being "owned" by a process. There is no field in the ICMP protocol which differentiates ICMP "sessions" on a per-process basis, and this is because ICMP has no concept of "sessions" -- ICMP messages are directed at IP endpoints. The networking stack will only selectively dispatch ICMP traffic based on two conditions: 1. ip_proto number (raw sockets may selectively bind to a protocol) and 2. multicast group membership (not applicable in this instance). > It also shows that both echo requests have different identifiers in the id field which should keep the icmp streams seperated. There is absolutely no requirement for the kernel code to look at the ID field, beyond reporting it to consumers of the SOCK_RAW interface. This PR can be closed, the submitter should consult the pfSense maintainers. thanks BMS ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: Backporting iwn(4): WPA auth hangs... Help!
On Sun, 21 Sep 2008, Gavin Atkinson wrote: I'm attempting to backport the iwn(4) driver for the Intel 4965 driver from -HEAD to RELENG_7 and am getting stuck with it at one particular point: WPA authentication times out. I've includewd the output with all options within wlandebug enabled at http://people.freebsd.org/~gavin/iwn/ (net.wlan.0.debug: 0x5fff1fe0) Tomorrow, I'll see what I can see by sniffing the wire. Thanks, Gavin ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: kern/127528: [icmp]: icmp socket receives icmp replies not owned by the process.
Bruce M. Simpson wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Old Synopsis: icmp socket receives icmp replies not owned by the process. New Synopsis: [icmp]: icmp socket receives icmp replies not owned by the process. This PR is bogus because: ICMP has no concept of datagrams being "owned" by a process. There is no field in the ICMP protocol which differentiates ICMP "sessions" on a per-process basis, and this is because ICMP has no concept of "sessions" -- ICMP messages are directed at IP endpoints. ICMP echo and echo replies do have "sessions" of sorts, at least unique identifying fields - identifier and sequence number. This was opened by a pfSense maintainer because it's a change in behavior from 6.x releases where this was never an issue, and is something we feel is a regression. Ideally you don't want to be pinging the same host from two different processes, but it's difficult to avoid in some circumstances and it's something that always worked fine prior to FreeBSD 7.0. Thanks, Chris ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: kern/127528: [icmp]: icmp socket receives icmp replies not owned by the process.
The following reply was made to PR kern/127528; it has been noted by GNATS. From: Chris Buechler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Bruce M. Simpson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: kern/127528: [icmp]: icmp socket receives icmp replies not owned by the process. Date: Sun, 21 Sep 2008 19:11:05 -0400 Bruce M. Simpson wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Old Synopsis: icmp socket receives icmp replies not owned by the >> process. >> New Synopsis: [icmp]: icmp socket receives icmp replies not owned by >> the process. >> > > This PR is bogus because: > ICMP has no concept of datagrams being "owned" by a process. There is > no field in the ICMP protocol which differentiates ICMP "sessions" on > a per-process basis, and this is because ICMP has no concept of > "sessions" -- ICMP messages are directed at IP endpoints. ICMP echo and echo replies do have "sessions" of sorts, at least unique identifying fields - identifier and sequence number. This was opened by a pfSense maintainer because it's a change in behavior from 6.x releases where this was never an issue, and is something we feel is a regression. Ideally you don't want to be pinging the same host from two different processes, but it's difficult to avoid in some circumstances and it's something that always worked fine prior to FreeBSD 7.0. Thanks, Chris ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-bugs To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: kern/127529: [nfe] [patch] Summary of Nvidia 8200/MCP78S chipset, notably req nfe driver update
Old Synopsis: Summary of Nvidia 8200/MCP78S chipset, notably req nfe driver update New Synopsis: [nfe] [patch] Summary of Nvidia 8200/MCP78S chipset, notably req nfe driver update Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-net Responsible-Changed-By: linimon Responsible-Changed-When: Mon Sep 22 04:24:43 UTC 2008 Responsible-Changed-Why: Over to maintainer(s). http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=127529 ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
Re: [X-POST] Anyone porting NetworkManager to FreeBSD ?
Joe Marcus Clarke writes: > On Sun, 2008-09-21 at 03:26 +0530, Ashish Shukla आशीष शुक्ल wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> Is there anyone, who is porting NetworkManager[1] to FreeBSD ? If yes, I >> would like to be a tester or contributor to the effort. > It's been on our ideas list for a while, and I think someone mentioned > they were working on it a few months ago (check the archives). I held a > desktop discussion at the last BSDCan, and Kris Moore of PC-BSD > suggested it may be easier to port their network manager > (http://svn.pcbsd.org/browser/pcbsd/trunk/NetworkManager) from KDE to > GTK+/GNOME > In the meantime, I did a GNOME PBI for PC-BSD, and added hooks to make > use of some of PC-BSD's admin tools. The result was positive. However, > it would be great to have working GTK+/GNOME native tools. Thanks for the reply. But, that looks like a static network configuration tool. Ashish -- () ascii ribbon campaign - against HTML e-mail /\ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments ·-- ·- ·--- ·- ···- ·- ·--·-· --· -- ·- ·· ·-·· ·-·-·- -·-· --- -- % dig +short cname cdac.in @::1 microsoft.gov.in pgp4pb2cO0rRG.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: kern/127529: [nfe] [patch] Summary of Nvidia 8200/MCP78S chipset, notably req nfe driver update
Synopsis: [nfe] [patch] Summary of Nvidia 8200/MCP78S chipset, notably req nfe driver update State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback State-Changed-By: yongari State-Changed-When: Mon Sep 22 06:25:38 UTC 2008 State-Changed-Why: Would you try patch at the followng URL? http://people.freebsd.org/~yongari/nfe/nfe.mcp77_79.patch Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-net->yongari Responsible-Changed-By: yongari Responsible-Changed-When: Mon Sep 22 06:25:38 UTC 2008 Responsible-Changed-Why: Grab. http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=127529 ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
