Does Netgraph in FBSD 5.x SMP requires GIANT lock?

[Vincent Jardin]

Maybe one giant2thread node could be introduced into the graphs. It could put 
the messages and the mbufs into a queue from a giant context, then they could 
be processed from a thread.

Is it a possible architecture or do I forget something ?

Regards,
  Vincent

Le Jeudi 5 Juin 2003 13:38, Julian Elischer a écrit :
> On Thu, 5 Jun 2003, Michael Shiu wrote:
> > Dear all,
> >
> > Just like to know if the netgraph code running 5.x SMP kernel requires
> > the GIANT lock?
>
> Netgraph has lovking  built into it but I have not
> had teh time yet to "thrown the switch" and run it without
> giant. (actually it would only have giant if the edge node that
> introduces the packet has giant, or if it's running
> as a net thread.)
>
> What is your graph like?
>
> > I have the netgraph doing bridging right now but the performance is
> > limited by the CPU (right now, it is something around 100k pkt/s in
> > 4-STABLE). Does adding another CPU together with upgrading to 5.x be of
> > any help? I guess the bottleneck right now is only one thread is
> > executing in interrupt context with GIANT being held. Am I right?
> >
> > _Michael
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > freebsd-net at freebsd.org mailing list
> > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
> > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-net at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"