Stefan Lambrev wrote:
Greetings,
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Yes, it is gone with 8.0. Disable the module builds because some of
them like this one probably need compile fixes. If you need a subset
of modules use MODULES_OVERRIDE=list (in /etc/make.conf)
Yes, kernel builds.
I'm still playing with it, but the first results shows that new kernel
can handle 800k incoming packets (well may be more but I have not enough
power right now to generate more packets).
It still answer only to 250K-260K. I guess I'm hitting the limitation of
syncache/syncookies ?
Yes, it could be. You may need to tune the net.inet.tcp.syncache
parameters to get better performance. That is good news though.
Anyway this netisr2 looks like huge improvement :)
Actually I forgot to mention: you probably want to set net.isr2.direct=1.
I can't build kernel without option LOCK_PROFILING with your sources:
make -V CFILES -V SYSTEM_CFILES -V GEN_CFILES | MKDEP_CPP="cc -E"
CC="cc" xargs mkdep -a -f .newdep -O2 -frename-registers -pipe
-fno-strict-aliasing -march=nocona -std=c99 -g -Wall -Wredundant-decls
-Wnested-externs -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes
-Wpointer-arith -Winline -Wcast-qual -Wundef -Wno-pointer-sign
-fformat-extensions -nostdinc -I. -I/usr/src/sys
-I/usr/src/sys/contrib/altq -I/usr/src/sys/contrib/ipfilter
-I/usr/src/sys/contrib/pf -I/usr/src/sys/dev/ath
-I/usr/src/sys/contrib/ngatm -I/usr/src/sys/dev/twa
-I/usr/src/sys/gnu/fs/xfs/FreeBSD
-I/usr/src/sys/gnu/fs/xfs/FreeBSD/support -I/usr/src/sys/gnu/fs/xfs
-D_KERNEL -DHAVE_KERNEL_OPTION_HEADERS -include opt_global.h -fno-common
-finline-limit=8000 --param inline-unit-growth=100 --param
large-function-growth=1000 -mcmodel=kernel -mno-red-zone -mfpmath=387
-mno-sse -mno-sse2 -mno-mmx -mno-3dnow -msoft-float
-fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -ffreestanding
In file included from /usr/src/sys/netinet/ip_output.c:47:
/usr/src/sys/sys/rwlock.h:153:2: error: #error LOCK_DEBUG not defined,
include <sys/lock.h> before <sys/rwlock.h>
mkdep: compile failed
*** Error code 1
So I added #include <sys/lock.h>, rebuild kernel and tested again w/o
LOCK_PROFILING, but results are the same.
Thanks, I think I forgot to check in another fix. As you found though,
LOCK_PROFILING does not have a large performance impact when compiled in
but not active.
I'll use again hwpmc and LOCK_PROFILING to see what's going on.
And will try the same benchmark on quad core processor as now numbers of
cores/cpus matter :)
That will certainly be interesting to test!
Kris
_______________________________________________
freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
