Re: Comparing Mutiqueue Support Linux vs FreeBSD

2013-06-27 Thread Takuya ASADA
Maybe we need to add some more generic APIs on NIC driver's ioctl, and invoke it from ifconfig. Or if you hate to add things on ifconfig, just make another command like ethtool from scratch. And driver can export driver specific things via sysctl, some driver already doing in that way. 2013年6月27日木

Re: Comparing Mutiqueue Support Linux vs FreeBSD

2013-06-26 Thread Adrian Chadd
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 d

Re: Comparing Mutiqueue Support Linux vs FreeBSD

2013-06-26 Thread Jack Vogel
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

Re: Comparing Mutiqueue Support Linux vs FreeBSD

2013-06-26 Thread Super Bisquit
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 wrote: > Hi, > > Because there was an discussion about n

Comparing Mutiqueue Support Linux vs FreeBSD

2013-06-26 Thread Takuya ASADA
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