From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Mar 8 20:13:32 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BB2C106566B; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 20:13:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bc979@lafn.org) Received: from zoom.lafn.org (zoom.lafn.ORG [206.117.18.8]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70E1A8FC1D; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 20:13:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [10.0.1.4] (pool-71-109-144-133.lsanca.dsl-w.verizon.net [71.109.144.133]) (authenticated bits=0) by zoom.lafn.org (8.14.3/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o28JYvci070955 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Mon, 8 Mar 2010 11:34:58 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from bc979@lafn.org) References: In-Reply-To: Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Message-Id: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable From: Doug Hardie Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 11:34:56 -0800 To: Robert Watson X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.95.3 at zoom.lafn.org X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: stable@freebsd.org, current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Survey results very helpful, thanks! (was: Re: net.inet.tcp.timer_race: does anyone have a non-zero value?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 20:13:32 -0000 On 8 March 2010, at 06:53, Robert Watson wrote: >=20 > On Sun, 7 Mar 2010, Robert Watson wrote: >=20 >> If your system shows a non-zero value, please send me a *private = e-mail* with the output of that command, plus also the output of "sysctl = kern.smp", "uptime", and a brief description of the workload and network = interface configuration. For example: it's a busy 8-core web server = with roughly X connections/second, and that has three em network = interfaces used to load balance from an upstream source. IPSEC is used = for management purposes (but not bulk traffic), and there's a local = MySQL database. >=20 > I've now received a number of reports that confirm our suspicion that = the race does occur, albeit very rarely, and particularly on systems = with many cores or multiple network interfaces. Fixing it is definitely = on the TODO for 9.0, both to improve our ability to do multiple virtual = network stacks, but with an appropriately scalable fix in mind given our = improved TCP scalability for 9.0 as well. I run a number of 4 core systems with em interfaces. These are = production systems that are unmanned and located a long way from me. = Under unusual conditions it can take up to 6 hours to get there. I have = been waiting to switch to 8.0 because of the discussions on the em = device and now it sounds like I had better just skip 8.x and wait for 9. = 7.2 is working just fine.=