Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2013 11:11:04 -0700 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: Lev Serebryakov <lev@freebsd.org> Cc: Lawrence Stewart <lstewart@freebsd.org>, Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it>, FreeBSD Net <net@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: it's the output, not ack coalescing (Re: TSO and FreeBSD vs Linux) Message-ID: <CAJ-VmokxgWKeuPFGEE-wzLcYpyt3Ua90JZH2BBTj39LoTSUsMg@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <587579055.20130814154713@serebryakov.spb.ru> References: <520A6D07.5080106@freebsd.org> <520AFBE8.1090109@freebsd.org> <520B24A0.4000706@freebsd.org> <520B3056.1000804@freebsd.org> <20130814102109.GA63246@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <587579055.20130814154713@serebryakov.spb.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 14 August 2013 04:47, Lev Serebryakov <lev@freebsd.org> wrote: > And we should invalidate this info on ARP/route changes, or connection > will be lost in such cases, am I right?.. So, on each such event code > should look into all sockets and check, if routing/ARP information is > still > valid for them. Or we should store lists of sockets in routing and ARP > tables... I don't know, what is worse. > .. or per-CPU copies of the ARP table.. ? -adrian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-VmokxgWKeuPFGEE-wzLcYpyt3Ua90JZH2BBTj39LoTSUsMg>