On 30/12/2020 12:57, Eugene Grosbein wrote:
30.12.2020 16:44, Victor Gamov wrote:
Currently I'm thinking about ethernet flow control: Host-B connected to
VLAN-750 on the third switch has 1G link (via igb driver)
and both Host-A and Host-B has fc=3. So when Host-B get microburst it can send
PAUSE and Host-A start to fill queue.
But FC disabled for all switches and I'm not sure about PAUSE can be propagated
from Host-A to Host-B
AFAIK, pause frames are not forwarded. For short term you should make flow
control settings consistent
between link partners,
As I understand hw.ix.flow_control=3 to allow flow-control for
negotiation. Real PAUSE setting will be set during negotiation. So
where I can find active flow-control setting for host interface?
maybe increase kern.ipc.maxsockbuf and then net.inet.udp.recvspace.
Eugene, at first message you suppose Host-A (sender) "outgoing link for
that UDP packets is congested" because this host shows non-zero "dropped
due to full socket buffers". So is net.inet.udp.recvspace increasing
on Host-B (mainly receiver) will be affected for this congestion? Or I
need to try to increase both kern.ipc.maxsockbuf and
net.inet.udp.recvspace on both hosts?
Also how I can check current sockbuf usage?
But for long term you should consider adding more links and create LACP
aggregate
so not input nor output link be close to congestion.
I'll migrate to 10G on Host-B at next month.
Thanks for your advise!
--
CU,
Victor Gamov
_______________________________________________
freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list
https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
