I just made my first putback to ON (6487387 pcic driver contains obsolete & private Tadpole code that should be removed).
While this is nothing earth shattering, hopefully I'll be making a lot more commits soon.
Friday, April 6, 2007
Thursday, April 5, 2007
Inland Empire Solaris Users?
I've been wondering how many other OpenSolaris users there are out there in the Inland Empire. I recently met one close to me, which surprised me quite a bit. I figured I was the only one within at least a 30 mile radius.
If there are others of you out there, please drop me a line. I'd like to inquire as to whether it makes sense to consider starting a User's Group for the area. Possibly we could join up with any other User Groups for Southern California.
For the record I live in southwest Riverside county, not far from Temecula and Murrieta. (For those of you not familiar with the west coast, the Inland Empire refers to a large region of southern California that is separated from the coastal areas of Orange and Los Angeles counties by a range of coastal mountains. I often have joked that I'm about 65 miles from any natural technology center, but now I'm not so sure. And I think a lot of people who commute to places like San Diego and LA live out here.)
If there are others of you out there, please drop me a line. I'd like to inquire as to whether it makes sense to consider starting a User's Group for the area. Possibly we could join up with any other User Groups for Southern California.
For the record I live in southwest Riverside county, not far from Temecula and Murrieta. (For those of you not familiar with the west coast, the Inland Empire refers to a large region of southern California that is separated from the coastal areas of Orange and Los Angeles counties by a range of coastal mountains. I often have joked that I'm about 65 miles from any natural technology center, but now I'm not so sure. And I think a lot of people who commute to places like San Diego and LA live out here.)
Sunday, April 1, 2007
ancient history (IEN-116 must die!)
Funny note. When I came back to Sun (two weeks ago), I discovered that an ancient PSARC case (2002/356) for the removal of the Trivial Name Server (in.tnamed) had never been completed. So for 5-odd years since we've continued to ship this long-since-obsolete protocol. I'm going to go ahead and drive forward with the actual removal... at the time I did it as a case study in how much process was involved with even a simple EOF. Lets see how long this one takes. (For the record, the IEN-116 protocol was obsolete as far back as 1986, when J. Postel first requested vendors ditch it.)
afe and mxfe pending updates
Those of you using afe (and also mxfe) will be pleased to note that the time is fast approaching when afe will hopefully be integrated into Solaris Nevada. There is a PSARC fasttrack scheduled for it next week if I understand correctly. (I don't have the case number yet.)
There are a few ramifications of this. One of the most immediate is that I'm going to be winding down support for versions of Solaris earlier than 10. In fact, I no longer have any personal installations running anything less than S10u3, and most everything is running Nevada.
The other reason for me to do this is so that I can immediately start taking advantage of some features that are present in Solaris 10 and Nevada. For example, I want to add support for DLPI link notification, and ultimately (in Nevada) port to GLDv3.
The GLDv3 has some compelling features, and as a result afe and mxfe will gain support for features like vlans, jumbo frames, and interrupt blanking. And, they'll also benefit from the increased performance gains afforded by the GLDv3 framework.
It isn't clear to me that I'll be supporting GLDv3 for Solaris 10 (the interfaces are not yet public), but at least in Nevada I will. And even for S10, I'll probably be using new GLDv2 features that are not available to older releases. (Like the DLPI link notification.)
Before I do this, I will be spinning one last significant bug fix release for afe and mxfe, which addresses several significant bugs found by Sun's QA group. (Including the fact that afe has not functioned properly with multicast since it was first written!)
Watch the web page for more details.
There are a few ramifications of this. One of the most immediate is that I'm going to be winding down support for versions of Solaris earlier than 10. In fact, I no longer have any personal installations running anything less than S10u3, and most everything is running Nevada.
The other reason for me to do this is so that I can immediately start taking advantage of some features that are present in Solaris 10 and Nevada. For example, I want to add support for DLPI link notification, and ultimately (in Nevada) port to GLDv3.
The GLDv3 has some compelling features, and as a result afe and mxfe will gain support for features like vlans, jumbo frames, and interrupt blanking. And, they'll also benefit from the increased performance gains afforded by the GLDv3 framework.
It isn't clear to me that I'll be supporting GLDv3 for Solaris 10 (the interfaces are not yet public), but at least in Nevada I will. And even for S10, I'll probably be using new GLDv2 features that are not available to older releases. (Like the DLPI link notification.)
Before I do this, I will be spinning one last significant bug fix release for afe and mxfe, which addresses several significant bugs found by Sun's QA group. (Including the fact that afe has not functioned properly with multicast since it was first written!)
Watch the web page for more details.
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Not All GigE Are Equal
As a consequence of work I've been doing lately since I joined Sun, I've learned some things that folks who care a great deal about performance might like to know.
The most important of these is that not all gigabit cards are created equal. And even among those that are, some of them get preferential treatment at Sun.
One surprise: the gigE device that gets the most preferential treatment is not a Sun branded NIC. In fact, its a device that you can readily find at your local computer retailer.
I speak of bge.
The bge (Broadcom) NIC has some very, very sophisticated logic on it, that Crossbow is going to be able to take advantage of to get you some very nice performance acceleration, plus some greatly added support for QoS and stack virtualization. If you're thinking about a NIC, my first choice would be a Broadcom NIC.
The Cassini (Sun Gigaswift) has many of the same features, but costs more, and is harder to find. And, the Cassini isn't supported by some of the crossbow features -- yet. This issue will of course get resolved, but for the immediate now, your best bet is a broadcom NIC, especially if you want to run Solaris.
The other commodity NICs (RealTek 8169, Intel Pro/G, etc.) are certainly nice enough, but the features on these nics are an incremental update over similar 100 Mbit hardware, and don't hold a candle to the separate hardware rings, advanced classification engines, and similar features present in the broadcom and cassini hardware. (Noteably, these features will be more important with 10G NICs, and devices like Neptune -- Sun's 10G offering, will be featuring them prominently.) And finally, now that 10G and stack virtualization need these features, Solaris is going to start taking advantage of them. Some of this is already in Nevada, and more is on the way soon.
I wouldn't be surprised if other high-end NIC developers (Intel? Marvell?) start offering these features in future updates, although I expect some players (such as RealTek) will continue to focus on much simpler (and hence cheaper) devices.
The most important of these is that not all gigabit cards are created equal. And even among those that are, some of them get preferential treatment at Sun.
One surprise: the gigE device that gets the most preferential treatment is not a Sun branded NIC. In fact, its a device that you can readily find at your local computer retailer.
I speak of bge.
The bge (Broadcom) NIC has some very, very sophisticated logic on it, that Crossbow is going to be able to take advantage of to get you some very nice performance acceleration, plus some greatly added support for QoS and stack virtualization. If you're thinking about a NIC, my first choice would be a Broadcom NIC.
The Cassini (Sun Gigaswift) has many of the same features, but costs more, and is harder to find. And, the Cassini isn't supported by some of the crossbow features -- yet. This issue will of course get resolved, but for the immediate now, your best bet is a broadcom NIC, especially if you want to run Solaris.
The other commodity NICs (RealTek 8169, Intel Pro/G, etc.) are certainly nice enough, but the features on these nics are an incremental update over similar 100 Mbit hardware, and don't hold a candle to the separate hardware rings, advanced classification engines, and similar features present in the broadcom and cassini hardware. (Noteably, these features will be more important with 10G NICs, and devices like Neptune -- Sun's 10G offering, will be featuring them prominently.) And finally, now that 10G and stack virtualization need these features, Solaris is going to start taking advantage of them. Some of this is already in Nevada, and more is on the way soon.
I wouldn't be surprised if other high-end NIC developers (Intel? Marvell?) start offering these features in future updates, although I expect some players (such as RealTek) will continue to focus on much simpler (and hence cheaper) devices.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Congratulations new OGB
Its official!
The OpenSolaris Constitution has been ratified. Yay!
Congratulations to the new OGB as well. I'm generally very pleased with the election results, despite not getting elected myself.
A few interesting tid bits:
1) Rich Teer is the only non-Sun OGB member. (And apparently he has done some work for Sun.)
2) The entire OGB seems to be made up of engineers.
3) Neither female member was elected.
4) There are two ARC members sitting. (James Carlson and Alan Coopersmith.)
5) There seems to be good geographical representation... i.e. MPK (and SFBay in general) don't seem to be overweighted.
6) Several members have sat on other FOSS boards (at least Glynn and Alan)
I would have liked to see someone with more marketing and program management elected.
In future years, I'd like to see the process for Core Contributor grants revised. I think only folks who are active in the community should have this role ... I think a lot of people got grants just because they committed code as part of their day jobs at Sun. Also, there should be a limit to how many Core Contributors a given community can elect... the large number of user-group contributors could have had an adverse effect on results. I would also like to see 1) term limits, and 2) limits on the number of members working for (affiliated with) any one employer. (Not more than 3.) But those are ideas for the new OGB to think about.
Again, congratulations to the new OGB, and a BIG thank-you to everyone who voted (regardless of whether you voted for me or not.)
The OpenSolaris Constitution has been ratified. Yay!
Congratulations to the new OGB as well. I'm generally very pleased with the election results, despite not getting elected myself.
A few interesting tid bits:
1) Rich Teer is the only non-Sun OGB member. (And apparently he has done some work for Sun.)
2) The entire OGB seems to be made up of engineers.
3) Neither female member was elected.
4) There are two ARC members sitting. (James Carlson and Alan Coopersmith.)
5) There seems to be good geographical representation... i.e. MPK (and SFBay in general) don't seem to be overweighted.
6) Several members have sat on other FOSS boards (at least Glynn and Alan)
I would have liked to see someone with more marketing and program management elected.
In future years, I'd like to see the process for Core Contributor grants revised. I think only folks who are active in the community should have this role ... I think a lot of people got grants just because they committed code as part of their day jobs at Sun. Also, there should be a limit to how many Core Contributors a given community can elect... the large number of user-group contributors could have had an adverse effect on results. I would also like to see 1) term limits, and 2) limits on the number of members working for (affiliated with) any one employer. (Not more than 3.) But those are ideas for the new OGB to think about.
Again, congratulations to the new OGB, and a BIG thank-you to everyone who voted (regardless of whether you voted for me or not.)
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Just Voted
I just cast my ballot for the OGB and ratification of the constitution.
I will not tell you who I voted for, but I will say two things.
First off, the decision was hard. There are some excellent candidates running. I'm pretty confident that we are going to have a great OGB, made of up reasonable individuals who are passionate about OpenSolaris. (Yes, I did vote for myself, but I also voted for quite a few other people... there are 7 seats, after all.)
Second, I did vote to ratify the Draft Consitution. I hope you did, too.
The window of time to cast your ballot is quickly drawing to a close. Polls close on Monday, so be sure to cast your ballot before then. Unlike some others, I waited a bit, primarily because I wanted to hear what some of the other candidates had to say. So even if you have not voted yet, please do so today. Even if you abstain from voting on the candidates, at least make a statement on the ratification of the constitution. I believe it is important to get at least a 51% turnout. I believe there are around 260 eligible voters, so far only 85 ballots have been cast.
So, as Glynn says, think of the kittens and VOTE!
I will not tell you who I voted for, but I will say two things.
First off, the decision was hard. There are some excellent candidates running. I'm pretty confident that we are going to have a great OGB, made of up reasonable individuals who are passionate about OpenSolaris. (Yes, I did vote for myself, but I also voted for quite a few other people... there are 7 seats, after all.)
Second, I did vote to ratify the Draft Consitution. I hope you did, too.
The window of time to cast your ballot is quickly drawing to a close. Polls close on Monday, so be sure to cast your ballot before then. Unlike some others, I waited a bit, primarily because I wanted to hear what some of the other candidates had to say. So even if you have not voted yet, please do so today. Even if you abstain from voting on the candidates, at least make a statement on the ratification of the constitution. I believe it is important to get at least a 51% turnout. I believe there are around 260 eligible voters, so far only 85 ballots have been cast.
So, as Glynn says, think of the kittens and VOTE!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)