Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 12:48:56 -0400 From: Jung-uk Kim <jkim@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Cc: =?utf-8?q?J=C4=99drzej_Kalinowski?= <kalinoj1@iem.pw.edu.pl>, rpaulo@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: qemu 0.10.1 PCAP networking on CURRENT Message-ID: <200903261249.00104.jkim@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <962f2e5dc273dac6f2a2aaf017763bb2@iem.pw.edu.pl> References: <962f2e5dc273dac6f2a2aaf017763bb2@iem.pw.edu.pl>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[CC added] On Thursday 26 March 2009 04:55 am, Jędrzej Kalinowski wrote: > Hi, > > I'm working with latest qemu port (0.10.1) submitted by Juergen > Lock. Pcap networking didn't work ok for me - it was terribly slow. > > I'm on a 8.0-CURRENT system, so I don't know if it is also the case > in older releases. Nevertheless, if someone experiences similiar > problems, you can try this patch - it helped me: --- (PATCH removed) --- libpcap 1.0.0 was imported few days ago but it didn't merge the following local hack: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/contrib/libpcap/pcap.h.diff?r1=1.13;r2=1.14 Your patch is harmless but it should be fixed in pcap.h and/or net/bpf.h properly not to step on each other unless the plan is to add PCAP_DONT_INCLUDE_PCAP_BPF_H everywhere in our ports tree to get FreeBSD-specific definitions. For example, the QEMU patch needs at least two ioctl definitions to get it really working, i.e., BIOCIMMEDIATE and BIOCFEEDBACK, which are only present in net/bpf.h. In fact, pcap-bpf.c itself has a hack for AIX like this: #ifdef _AIX /* * Make "pcap.h" not include "pcap/bpf.h"; we are going to include the * native OS version, as we need "struct bpf_config" from it. */ #define PCAP_DONT_INCLUDE_PCAP_BPF_H #include <sys/types.h> /* * Prevent bpf.h from redefining the DLT_ values to their * IFT_ values, as we're going to return the standard libpcap * values, not IBM's non-standard IFT_ values. */ #undef _AIX #include <net/bpf.h> #define _AIX ... #else /* _AIX */ #include <net/bpf.h> #endif /* _AIX */ This is absolutely disgusting. IMHO, I don't think it is a good idea to pollute ports tree with local patches like that. Jung-uk Kim
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200903261249.00104.jkim>