- User Since
- Feb 5 2016, 2:19 PM (93 w, 2 d)
Good catch for the no_dad!
Add no_dad to inet6 setup for avoiding a sleep
Fri, Nov 17
How to dump a panic when the kernel crash during boot before loading disk controller drivers ?
Can I compile a kernel with .debug embedded into the kernel ?
New tests output following r325872 that fixed cbc key lenght:
Updating test scripts following kristof's advices
Wed, Nov 15
Once I've applied this patch on my system (that is already patched with D112727 and D13096) it panic.
Tue, Nov 14
I don't reach to apply the patch, and when I've tried to "manually" merge it, I've broke the compilation :-(
Mon, Nov 13
Here are my updated benches "forwarding smallest packet size" results on 2 different hardware.
I'm using a fresh head (r325763) and the latest diff (35190) of this review.
Fri, Nov 10
I've tried to update my previous benches, but on a recent head (r325618), and this review need to be updated because it no more apply (a small part was committed into head).
And compilation failed on this recent head too:
Thu, Nov 9
Wed, Nov 8
Sun, Nov 5
Fri, Nov 3
Wed, Nov 1
Tue, Oct 31
Mon, Oct 30
I confirm: I'm using static key only on my tests.
Fri, Oct 27
I've found the commit that broke AES-GCM: r324037 "aesni(4): Add support for x86 SHA intrinsics".
But how is possible that I'm impacted without loading aesni module ?!?
And now comparing pf vs ipfw:
Wow, results regarding the 5M UDP session bench:
After adding a new port, you need to add it to the category Makefile too (here in devel/Makefile): I didn't see modifications to devel/Makefile here.
And each time I'm touching such category Makefile file, I'm checking index is still building fine with an indexbuild (cd /usr/port; make index).
Thu, Oct 26
Here is on a Xeon 8cores with Chelsio results, 2000 UDP flows of small packet size:
Wed, Oct 25
After more test: Your patch correctly fix aes-cbc key length.
After more test there is still a problem somewhere: I'm digging it and will add more information.
Does this fall into the "Build fixes which cause a package to become compilable where it was previously failing" of the "Examples of changes which do not require a PORTREVISION bump" ?
Mon, Oct 23
Oct 20 2017
Oct 19 2017
Oct 18 2017
Oct 16 2017
Oct 13 2017
Oct 12 2017
Oct 11 2017
Oct 9 2017
Oct 8 2017
Oct 6 2017
Just wait for @swills approval before committing it because this port belongs to him.
Sep 29 2017
Only people who are working can break things.
Sep 28 2017
Lot's of patch files were renamed with a special name: Is this correct ?
Sep 22 2017
Yeah!!! You've fixed the problem.
Sep 15 2017
Small comestic proposal (check my 2 comments).
Sep 13 2017
It's okay, portlint is just an helper tool and didn't catch this port complexity.
Sep 12 2017
Sep 8 2017
Don't know what is a "mad64" arch, but it's okay :)-
Sep 7 2017
Sep 6 2017
Sep 5 2017
Sep 4 2017
Sep 1 2017
I didn't rebuild the full doc for testing error syntax, but by reading all of your changes it seems okay.
Aug 30 2017
Does a "LICENSE= NONE" valid in this case ? (avoid complains from portlint -A)
Mmm… your email is not updated into the MAINTAINER field on this port: Your commit r448911 correctly updated all your email: Does this mean your are working on a non-updated local source tree ?
Aug 29 2017
Good: You correctly used the good capitalization rule for "FreeBSD" :-)
Aug 28 2017
How do you measure the 25% performance increase ?
Aug 14 2017
About 30% performance drop regression (from 2.8Mpps to 1.8Mpps) during forwarding of smallest packet:
Jul 21 2017
Jul 20 2017
Jul 19 2017
Jul 17 2017
Jul 6 2017
Jul 5 2017
On the first platform: PC Engines APU2C4 (quad core AMD GX-412T Processor 1 GHz), 3 Intel i210AT Gigabit Ethernet ports
- LRO/TSO disabled
- 2000 flows of smallest UDP packets
- Traffic load at 1.448Mpps (Gigabit line-rate)