On 10.05.2013 05:16, Barney Cordoba wrote: >>>> Network device driver is not guilty here, that's >> just pf's >>>> contention >>>> running in igb's context. >>> >>> They're both at play. Single threadedness aggravates >> subsystems that >>> have too many lock points. >>> >>> It can also be "solved" with using 1 queue, because >> then you don't >>> have 4 queues going into a single thread. >> >> Again, the problem is within pf(4)'s global lock, not in the >> igb(4). >> > > Again, you're wrong. It's not the bottleneck's fault; it's the fault of > the multi-threaded code for only working properly when there are no > bottlenecks.
In practice, the problem is easily solved without any change in the igb code. The same problem will occur for other NIC drivers too - if several NICs were combined within one lagg(4). So, driver is not guilty and solution would be same - eliminate bottleneck and you will be fine and capable to spread the load on several CPU cores. Therefore, I don't care of CS theory for this particular case. Eugene Grosbein _______________________________________________ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
