Re: kern/179975: [igb] igb(4) fails to do polling(4)
Old Synopsis: igb(4) fails to do polling(4) New Synopsis: [igb] igb(4) fails to do polling(4) State-Changed-From-To: open-patched State-Changed-By: linimon State-Changed-When: Wed Jun 26 06:32:48 UTC 2013 State-Changed-Why: apparently is already in 9-STABLE. Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs-freebsd-net Responsible-Changed-By: linimon Responsible-Changed-When: Wed Jun 26 06:32:48 UTC 2013 Responsible-Changed-Why: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=179975 ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
FreeBSD:: How to set VLAN priority?
Hello. I work with FreeBSD 9.1 RELEASE. I had configured VLANs on my server, but I can't find a way to configure VLAN priority. How can I do it? Thanks. Regards, Alex Liptsin Software Quality Assurance Engineer | Mellanox Technologies Ltd. Office: +972 (74) 7236141 Mobile: +972(54) 7833986 Fax: +972(74) 7236161 Email: al...@mellanox.commailto:al...@mellanox.com Mellanox, Tel-Hai Industrial Park. Building 7, M.P. Upper Galilee 12100 Israel ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: kern/179901: [netinet] [patch] Multicast SO_REUSEADDR handled incorrectly
The following reply was made to PR kern/179901; it has been noted by GNATS.
From: Michael Gmelin free...@grem.de
To: Mikolaj Golub troc...@freebsd.org
Cc: bug-follo...@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: kern/179901: [netinet] [patch] Multicast SO_REUSEADDR handled
incorrectly
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 15:03:40 +0200
On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 18:24:55 +0300
Mikolaj Golub troc...@freebsd.org wrote:
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 01:39:38PM +0200, Michael Gmelin wrote:
Yes, but it seems like your patch is fixing the not all places in
in6_pcb.c, I think you should modify the code at line 246 as well:
} else if (t (reuseport == 0 ||
(t-inp_flags2 INP_REUSEPORT) == 0)) {
return (EADDRINUSE);
}
so it says
} else if (t
(reuseport inp_so_options(t)) == 0) {
Good catch! I missed this because I was preparing the patch using
r227207 as a reference, but this had been missed there too (fixed
later in r233272 by glebius).
Once 1) has been resolved I can test on a machine running
9.1-RELEASE later (the patch is small enough to apply it manually).
I will run the unit test code from multicast.c I sent earlier and
add IPv6 test cases to it as well.
The updated patch is attached. Thanks.
Hi,
I adapted the test code, you can find it at
http://blog.grem.de/multicast.c
Test output is:
IPv4 Port :
Bind using SO_REUSEADDR...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEADDR...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEPORT...FAIL (NOT expected): Address already in
use IPv4 Port 5556:
Bind using SO_REUSEPORT...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEPORT...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEADDR...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEPORT...FAIL (NOT expected): Address already in
use IPv4 Port 5557:
Bind using SO_REUSEADDR x 2...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEADDR x 2...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEPORT...FAIL (NOT expected): Address already in
use Bind using SO_REUSEADDR...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEPORT...FAIL (NOT expected): Address already in
use IPv4 Port 5558:
Bind without socketopts...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEADDR...FAIL (expected): Address already in use
Bind using SO_REUSEPORT...FAIL (expected): Address already in use
IPv4 Port 5559:
Bind using SO_REUSEADDR...OK (expected)
Bind without socketopts...FAIL (expected): Address already in use
IPv4 Port 5560:
Bind using SO_REUSEPORT...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEPORT...OK (expected)
Bind without socketopts...FAIL (expected): Address already in use
IPv6 Port :
Bind using SO_REUSEADDR...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEADDR...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEPORT...FAIL (NOT expected): Address already in
use IPv6 Port 5556:
Bind using SO_REUSEPORT...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEPORT...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEADDR...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEPORT...FAIL (NOT expected): Address already in
use IPv6 Port 5557:
Bind using SO_REUSEADDR x 2...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEADDR x 2...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEPORT...FAIL (NOT expected): Address already in
use Bind using SO_REUSEADDR...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEPORT...FAIL (NOT expected): Address already in
use IPv6 Port 5558:
Bind without socketopts...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEADDR...FAIL (expected): Address already in use
Bind using SO_REUSEPORT...FAIL (expected): Address already in use
IPv6 Port 5559:
Bind using SO_REUSEADDR...OK (expected)
Bind without socketopts...FAIL (expected): Address already in use
IPv6 Port 5560:
Bind using SO_REUSEPORT...OK (expected)
Bind using SO_REUSEPORT...OK (expected)
Bind without socketopts...FAIL (expected): Address already in use
So you maintained the old PORT/ADDR behavior, which I think is not such
a great idea. I would suggest to get another opinion on this, just
because it's broken now doesn't mean we have to perpetuate it - maybe we
should compare the behavior with other Unix(like) OSes like the other
BSDs and Linux to see how their implementations work - usually ported
software is not changed in that respect, so being compatible is
valuable.
Besides my rant the code works as designed and seems to resemble the
behavior before r227207 correctly (I manually applied the patches to
9.1-RELEASE).
Fun fact: The code in ip6_output.c could have never worked in the first
place, since it used IN_MULTICAST instead of IN6_IS_ADDR_MULTICAST:
if (IN_MULTICAST(ntohl(in6p-inp_laddr.s_addr)))
...
Cheers,
Michael
--
Michael Gmelin
___
Re: FreeBSD:: How to set VLAN priority?
Alex Liptsin wrote this message on Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 11:54 +: I work with FreeBSD 9.1 RELEASE. I had configured VLANs on my server, but I can't find a way to configure VLAN priority. How can I do it? Looks like you can't w/ the default VLAN code: BUGS No 802.1Q features except VLAN tagging are implemented. You could probably implement it w/ ng_patch, but that would also mean you'd lose the feature of the card adding the VLAN tag for you... -- John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 415 225 5579 All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not. ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: FreeBSD:: How to set VLAN priority?
This is a patch originially written from rwatson@ iirc. https://github.com/pfsense/pfsense-tools/blob/master/patches/RELENG_10_0/pf_802.1p.diff Remove the pf(4) craft and it should work for you. On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 6:27 PM, John-Mark Gurney j...@funkthat.com wrote: Alex Liptsin wrote this message on Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 11:54 +: I work with FreeBSD 9.1 RELEASE. I had configured VLANs on my server, but I can't find a way to configure VLAN priority. How can I do it? Looks like you can't w/ the default VLAN code: BUGS No 802.1Q features except VLAN tagging are implemented. You could probably implement it w/ ng_patch, but that would also mean you'd lose the feature of the card adding the VLAN tag for you... -- John-Mark Gurney Voice: +1 415 225 5579 All that I will do, has been done, All that I have, has not. ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- Ermal ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Comparing Mutiqueue Support Linux vs FreeBSD
Hi, Because there was an discussion about new APIs to provide better support for high performance NICs in Ottawa DevSummit BoF, I wrote a note about How Linux doing it in that area. I haven't get a enough chance to talk about it in the summit, but I decided to upload the note on a Wiki. Here's a link: https://wiki.freebsd.org/201305DevSummit/NetworkReceivePerformance/ComparingMutiqueueSupportLinuxvsFreeBSD I hope it helps to decide what kind of interfaces/features do we need on FreeBSD. Takuya ASADA ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Comparing Mutiqueue Support Linux vs FreeBSD
If someone ports the ethtool to FreeBSD, it will only work on the i386/AMD64/ PC98 architectures. Perhaps having these suggestions as options for the kernel/GENERIC conf files would be better? On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Takuya ASADA s...@dokukino.com wrote: Hi, Because there was an discussion about new APIs to provide better support for high performance NICs in Ottawa DevSummit BoF, I wrote a note about How Linux doing it in that area. I haven't get a enough chance to talk about it in the summit, but I decided to upload the note on a Wiki. Here's a link: https://wiki.freebsd.org/201305DevSummit/NetworkReceivePerformance/ComparingMutiqueueSupportLinuxvsFreeBSD I hope it helps to decide what kind of interfaces/features do we need on FreeBSD. Takuya ASADA ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: kern/179999: [ofed] [patch] Bug assigning HCA from IB to ETH
Old Synopsis: Bug assigning HCA from IB to ETH New Synopsis: [ofed] [patch] Bug assigning HCA from IB to ETH Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs-freebsd-net Responsible-Changed-By: linimon Responsible-Changed-When: Wed Jun 26 23:10:19 UTC 2013 Responsible-Changed-Why: Over to maintainer(s). http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=17 ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Comparing Mutiqueue Support Linux vs FreeBSD
ethtool is GPL so I wouldn't expect it to show up around here :) Implementing something like it for FreeBSD would be cool however, sometimes sysctl just seems clunky although its usually how i cope with driver things that might be changed via ethtool in Linux. Having to completely rebuild a kernel for controlling RSS seems horribly clunky on the other hand. On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Super Bisquit superbisq...@gmail.comwrote: If someone ports the ethtool to FreeBSD, it will only work on the i386/AMD64/ PC98 architectures. Perhaps having these suggestions as options for the kernel/GENERIC conf files would be better? On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Takuya ASADA s...@dokukino.com wrote: Hi, Because there was an discussion about new APIs to provide better support for high performance NICs in Ottawa DevSummit BoF, I wrote a note about How Linux doing it in that area. I haven't get a enough chance to talk about it in the summit, but I decided to upload the note on a Wiki. Here's a link: https://wiki.freebsd.org/201305DevSummit/NetworkReceivePerformance/ComparingMutiqueueSupportLinuxvsFreeBSD I hope it helps to decide what kind of interfaces/features do we need on FreeBSD. Takuya ASADA ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: Comparing Mutiqueue Support Linux vs FreeBSD
ethtool is just a passthrough. The drivers need to implement all of those hooks. It wouldn't be that hard to reimplement. The drivers would have to reimplement it anyway - they'd have to implement the generic set of standard statistics, then export driver-specific things. You know, the stuff our drivers already expose via sysctl. adrian On 26 June 2013 17:02, Jack Vogel jfvo...@gmail.com wrote: ethtool is GPL so I wouldn't expect it to show up around here :) Implementing something like it for FreeBSD would be cool however, sometimes sysctl just seems clunky although its usually how i cope with driver things that might be changed via ethtool in Linux. Having to completely rebuild a kernel for controlling RSS seems horribly clunky on the other hand. On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 3:58 PM, Super Bisquit superbisq...@gmail.comwrote: If someone ports the ethtool to FreeBSD, it will only work on the i386/AMD64/ PC98 architectures. Perhaps having these suggestions as options for the kernel/GENERIC conf files would be better? On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 6:39 PM, Takuya ASADA s...@dokukino.com wrote: Hi, Because there was an discussion about new APIs to provide better support for high performance NICs in Ottawa DevSummit BoF, I wrote a note about How Linux doing it in that area. I haven't get a enough chance to talk about it in the summit, but I decided to upload the note on a Wiki. Here's a link: https://wiki.freebsd.org/201305DevSummit/NetworkReceivePerformance/ComparingMutiqueueSupportLinuxvsFreeBSD I hope it helps to decide what kind of interfaces/features do we need on FreeBSD. Takuya ASADA ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
