Re: vr speed issues
Jamie Clark wrote: Steven Hartland wrote: Charles Sprickman wrote: Backing up the 4.10 box was within an acceptable margin of wire speed (~8MB/s on 100M ethernet) given that a router was in the middle. That's roughly how the box has always performed. After installing 6.1_RELEASE and updating to RELENG_6 I started the restore. Maxed out at about 380kB/s. Now I tested the backup speed again and it has also dropepd to 380k. That speed is indicative of a FD / HD mismatch between the switch and the NIC if its hard coded try setting auto if its auto try hardcoding. N.B. Ensure both ends are set in the same way i.e. hard/auto or problems start. Both are auto and show 100 FD. The switch port stats show zeros on all the error counters. Good thinking though. I wouldn't yet rule out an external influence as I have not performed any in-depth diagnosis of this - but I can't think of anything obvious aside from the OS upgrade. -Jamie ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well my two embedded vr NICs work just fine. I get 8 - 9 MByte / second with FTP, using vsftpd, and 3-4 Mbyte / sec with SCP. Though this could also be current CPU issues, as the box is quite busy and the Via C3 isn't all that fast. I am running 6.2-PRERELEASE. Also, did you try device polling? Maybe that helps, although I currently don't have it in my kernel configuration. Here's an ifconfig output, let me know if you need anything else. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ ifconfig vr0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 inet 10.0.0.1 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255 ether 00:40:63:df:e5:ee media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex) status: active vr1: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 inet 192.168.1.5 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.1.255 ether 00:40:63:df:e5:4e media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex) status: active Cheers, Jorn ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: vr speed issues
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006, Jorn Argelo wrote: Jamie Clark wrote: Steven Hartland wrote: Charles Sprickman wrote: Backing up the 4.10 box was within an acceptable margin of wire speed (~8MB/s on 100M ethernet) given that a router was in the middle. That's roughly how the box has always performed. After installing 6.1_RELEASE and updating to RELENG_6 I started the restore. Maxed out at about 380kB/s. Now I tested the backup speed again and it has also dropepd to 380k. That speed is indicative of a FD / HD mismatch between the switch and the NIC if its hard coded try setting auto if its auto try hardcoding. N.B. Ensure both ends are set in the same way i.e. hard/auto or problems start. Both are auto and show 100 FD. The switch port stats show zeros on all the error counters. Good thinking though. I wouldn't yet rule out an external influence as I have not performed any in-depth diagnosis of this - but I can't think of anything obvious aside from the OS upgrade. -Jamie ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Well my two embedded vr NICs work just fine. I get 8 - 9 MByte / second with FTP, using vsftpd, and 3-4 Mbyte / sec with SCP. Though this could also be current CPU issues, as the box is quite busy and the Via C3 isn't all that fast. I am running 6.2-PRERELEASE. Also, did you try device polling? Maybe that helps, although I currently don't have it in my kernel configuration. Here's an ifconfig output, let me know if you need anything else. Can you snip the relevant section of pciconf -vl to see the chip version? It seems like this only happens with some of the Via Rhine II chips. Thanks, Charles [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~ ifconfig vr0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 inet 10.0.0.1 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 10.0.0.255 ether 00:40:63:df:e5:ee media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex) status: active vr1: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 inet 192.168.1.5 netmask 0xff00 broadcast 192.168.1.255 ether 00:40:63:df:e5:4e media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex) status: active Cheers, Jorn ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: vr speed issues
Charles Sprickman wrote: Hi all, I spent some time trying to track down slow tcp performance on a small office switched 100 LAN. We just put in a number of whitebox PCs running FreeBSD 6.1-p2/PC-BSD 1.2 that all have onboard Via Rhine 10/100 ethernet controllers. Performace with scp was around 200KB/s, ftp wavered between 300-500KB/s. This did not appear to be a duplex mismatch - unmanaged switch showed them all at 100/Full, put some other hosts on the same ports/cabling and got near wire speed. I took the cabling out of the equation, the switch, no improvement. The only thing that got me decent performance was putting two hosts back to back with an xover cable. I eventually realized that the only hosts with any speed issues in the office were these boxes with the Via ethernet. Putting an equally cheap DLink (RealTek/rl) in one of them gave me much better performance. [...] There might be something in this. I have a 2-3 yr old box with an Asus A7V8X mainboard. This has been running 4.10-RELEASE for about 2.5 years and yesterday I decided to bite the bullet and update to RELENG_6. I also decided to upgrade the internal storage as well so this entailed a backup/restore over the wire. Backing up the 4.10 box was within an acceptable margin of wire speed (~8MB/s on 100M ethernet) given that a router was in the middle. That's roughly how the box has always performed. After installing 6.1_RELEASE and updating to RELENG_6 I started the restore. Maxed out at about 380kB/s. Now I tested the backup speed again and it has also dropepd to 380k. This would definitely lead me to assume that something has gone awry in the driver over the past years. Unfortunately I have not been frequently updating this machine (my imap server) so I have no idea when the driver became broken. I realize that this is not much help in tracking the problem - but it seems to concur with the problem noted here earlier. FreeBSD 6.2-PRERELEASE #0: Thu Nov 30 16:29:04 SGT pciconf: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:18:0: class=0x02 card=0x80a11043 chip=0x30651106 rev=0x74 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT6102 Rhine II PCI Fast Ethernet Controller' class= network subclass = ethernet dmesg: vr0: VIA VT6102 Rhine II 10/100BaseTX port 0xb000-0xb0ff mem 0xf280-0xf28000ff at device 18.0 on pci0 miibus0: MII bus on vr0 rlphy0: RTL8201L 10/100 media interface on miibus0 rlphy0: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto vr0: Ethernet address: 00:0c:6e:3d:b9:0e $ ifconfig vr0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 inet6 fe80::20c:6eff:fe3d:b90e%vr0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1 inet 203.117.131.34 netmask 0xffc0 broadcast 203.117.131.63 inet 203.117.131.35 netmask 0x broadcast 203.117.131.35 ether 00:0c:6e:3d:b9:0e media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex) status: active -Jamie smime.p7s Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Re: vr speed issues
On Fri, 1 Dec 2006, Jamie Clark wrote: Charles Sprickman wrote: Hi all, I spent some time trying to track down slow tcp performance on a small office switched 100 LAN. We just put in a number of whitebox PCs running FreeBSD 6.1-p2/PC-BSD 1.2 that all have onboard Via Rhine 10/100 ethernet controllers. Performace with scp was around 200KB/s, ftp wavered between 300-500KB/s. This did not appear to be a duplex mismatch - unmanaged switch showed them all at 100/Full, put some other hosts on the same ports/cabling and got near wire speed. I took the cabling out of the equation, the switch, no improvement. The only thing that got me decent performance was putting two hosts back to back with an xover cable. I eventually realized that the only hosts with any speed issues in the office were these boxes with the Via ethernet. Putting an equally cheap DLink (RealTek/rl) in one of them gave me much better performance. [...] There might be something in this. I have a 2-3 yr old box with an Asus A7V8X mainboard. This has been running 4.10-RELEASE for about 2.5 years and yesterday I decided to bite the bullet and update to RELENG_6. I also decided to upgrade the internal storage as well so this entailed a backup/restore over the wire. Backing up the 4.10 box was within an acceptable margin of wire speed (~8MB/s on 100M ethernet) given that a router was in the middle. That's roughly how the box has always performed. After installing 6.1_RELEASE and updating to RELENG_6 I started the restore. Maxed out at about 380kB/s. Now I tested the backup speed again and it has also dropepd to 380k. Excellent! That's some good info. Same hardware, and you get performance like I'm seeing. There's lots of changes. :) http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/cvsweb.cgi/src/sys/pci/if_vr.c.diff?r1=1.26.2.14r2=1.116f=h This would definitely lead me to assume that something has gone awry in the driver over the past years. Unfortunately I have not been frequently updating this machine (my imap server) so I have no idea when the driver became broken. I realize that this is not much help in tracking the problem - but it seems to concur with the problem noted here earlier. I'm going to dig up some kind of 4.11 live cd, a 5.x live cd and some kind of simple linux live cd and have him do some quick ftp tests under each. If I see the same thing, then I'll file a PR and call this a regression. Thanks! Charles FreeBSD 6.2-PRERELEASE #0: Thu Nov 30 16:29:04 SGT pciconf: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:18:0: class=0x02 card=0x80a11043 chip=0x30651106 rev=0x74 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT6102 Rhine II PCI Fast Ethernet Controller' class= network subclass = ethernet dmesg: vr0: VIA VT6102 Rhine II 10/100BaseTX port 0xb000-0xb0ff mem 0xf280-0xf28000ff at device 18.0 on pci0 miibus0: MII bus on vr0 rlphy0: RTL8201L 10/100 media interface on miibus0 rlphy0: 10baseT, 10baseT-FDX, 100baseTX, 100baseTX-FDX, auto vr0: Ethernet address: 00:0c:6e:3d:b9:0e $ ifconfig vr0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 inet6 fe80::20c:6eff:fe3d:b90e%vr0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1 inet 203.117.131.34 netmask 0xffc0 broadcast 203.117.131.63 inet 203.117.131.35 netmask 0x broadcast 203.117.131.35 ether 00:0c:6e:3d:b9:0e media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex) status: active -Jamie ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: vr speed issues
Charles Sprickman wrote: Backing up the 4.10 box was within an acceptable margin of wire speed (~8MB/s on 100M ethernet) given that a router was in the middle. That's roughly how the box has always performed. After installing 6.1_RELEASE and updating to RELENG_6 I started the restore. Maxed out at about 380kB/s. Now I tested the backup speed again and it has also dropepd to 380k. That speed is indicative of a FD / HD mismatch between the switch and the NIC if its hard coded try setting auto if its auto try hardcoding. N.B. Ensure both ends are set in the same way i.e. hard/auto or problems start. Steve This e.mail is private and confidential between Multiplay (UK) Ltd. and the person or entity to whom it is addressed. In the event of misdirection, the recipient is prohibited from using, copying, printing or otherwise disseminating it or any information contained in it. In the event of misdirection, illegible or incomplete transmission please telephone +44 845 868 1337 or return the E.mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: vr speed issues
Steven Hartland wrote: Charles Sprickman wrote: Backing up the 4.10 box was within an acceptable margin of wire speed (~8MB/s on 100M ethernet) given that a router was in the middle. That's roughly how the box has always performed. After installing 6.1_RELEASE and updating to RELENG_6 I started the restore. Maxed out at about 380kB/s. Now I tested the backup speed again and it has also dropepd to 380k. That speed is indicative of a FD / HD mismatch between the switch and the NIC if its hard coded try setting auto if its auto try hardcoding. N.B. Ensure both ends are set in the same way i.e. hard/auto or problems start. Both are auto and show 100 FD. The switch port stats show zeros on all the error counters. Good thinking though. I wouldn't yet rule out an external influence as I have not performed any in-depth diagnosis of this - but I can't think of anything obvious aside from the OS upgrade. -Jamie ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: vr speed issues
Philipp Ost wrote: Charles Sprickman wrote: [snipped] Performace with scp was around 200KB/s, ftp wavered between 300-500KB/s. This did not appear to be a duplex mismatch - unmanaged switch showed them all at 100/Full, put some other hosts on the same ports/cabling and got near wire speed. I just checked with the boxes I have here. One is an Athon XP on a Asus board with a VIA Rhine II on board; the other is a `old' Celeron 500 on a MSI board with a Intel ``Pro 100/S Desktop Adapter''. I transfered a 538MiB file (some old CURRENT snapshot) via sftp. My result: from box one to box two (vr to fxp) I get 2.3MB/s; from box two to box one (fxp to vr) I get 3.1MB/s. The first box is running 6.2-PRERELEASE from 11/18, the Intel box is running 7.0-CURRENT from 11/24. Output of $ dmesg | grep vr vr0: VIA VT6102 Rhine II 10/100BaseTX port 0x8000-0x80ff mem 0xd600-0xd6ff at device 18.0 on pci0 miibus0: MII bus on vr0 and $ dmesg | grep fxp fxp0: Intel 82550 Pro/100 Ethernet port 0xc000-0xc03f mem 0xdd02-0xdd020fff,0xdd00-0xdd01 irq 11 at device 1.0 on pci1 miibus0: MII bus on fxp0 [...] fxp0: Microcode loaded, int_delay: 1000 usec bundle_max: 6 fxp0: Microcode loaded, int_delay: 1000 usec bundle_max: 6 That sounds awfully lot like a bad cable/connector aside from duplex mismatch. Especially the part about larger packets has more packet loss, which can be indicative of both. Duplex mismatch because a larger packet has a higher probability of getting junked by the part that believes the link is full duplex. Cable/Connector because a larger packet has a higher probability of getting junked by interference/lack of signal. Obtw: SFTP requires alot more due to encryption and is less likely to exhaust the 100mbit connection before exhausting other local resources. Many is surprised to learn that something around 9 out of 10 network failures is due to improper cabling. If in doubt get a good store made cat6 cable to verify and don't buy cheap for the cat5e's there really is a *big* difference. The cheapest is almost always the hardest to get right on the first try. Some cards can be suddenly reset when there are too many errors of one sort or another and the drivers do not reprogram the cards into the previously selected mode (if non autonegotiate settings are used). Drivers for VIA nic's on linux tends to be notorious that way. And NEVER set speed/duplex on any side unless you can set them on both (autoselect will default to half duplex when other end is non-autonegotiate) Try setting the mode to 10mbit/half duplex (and verify on switch) to see if the packet loss goes away. If it does then it's the cable, if it doesn't then it's still possible but less likely to be the cable. Please let us know what you find out. -- Sten Daniel Sørsdal ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: vr speed issues
Mark Kirkwood wrote: Charles Sprickman wrote: I also did a little more digging and noticed that once I start pinging from one of these hosts using large packet sizes, I get about 50-60% packet loss (ie: ping -s 1500 other.vr0.host). If I ping something with a decent card, I get about 30-50% packet loss. There's no packet loss with the default packet size. Anyone else with some vr cards feel like checking this out? I've got a VIA Rhine III card that I can dig out and put in if the data would be of any use/interest etc - FWIW I seem to recall being able to get reasonably close to wire speed when I was using it. I plugged in the card today, and seem to get pretty reasonable performance (8-10MB/s for scp - see attached). The two boxes are plugged into a Linksys router via store made cat5 or cat6 cables. The second box has an Intel PRO 100 (fxp) adapter. Removing the vr card and going back to fxp everywhere seems to provide better performance (e.g. get 9MB/s in the last test), but the vr performance is acceptable (maybe your router clashes with your card?). Cheers Mark Testing VIA Phine (vr) Adapter == Setup for box with vr adapter - # pciconf -lv [EMAIL PROTECTED]:9:0: class=0x02 card=0x14031186 chip=0x31061106 rev=0x86 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT6105M/LOM Rhine III PCI Fast Ethernet Controller' class= network subclass = ethernet # ifconfig vr0 vr0: flags=8843UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST mtu 1500 inet 192.168.1.11 netmask 0x broadcast 192.168.255.255 ether 00:0d:88:f5:83:50 media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX full-duplex) status: active Copy from box with vr adaptor to box with fxp adapter - $ scp host2:`pwd`/file . file 100% 861MB 9.8MB/s 01:28 [postgres:/data0/dump]$ ls file $ scp file host2:/tmp file 100% 861MB 9.7MB/s 01:29 Copy from box with fxp adapter to box with vr adapter - $ scp file host1:`pwd` file 100% 861MB 8.3MB/s 01:44 ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: vr speed issues
Mark Kirkwood wrote: I plugged in the card today, and seem to get pretty reasonable performance (8-10MB/s for scp - see attached). sorry, forgot to add... this is on: 6.2-PRERELEASE FreeBSD 6.2-PRERELEASE #0: Tue Nov 28 23:55:20 NZDT 2006 with a kernel that differs a small amount from GENERIC (SMP + sound + atapicam). ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: vr speed issues
On Fri, 1 Dec 2006, Mark Kirkwood wrote: Mark Kirkwood wrote: Charles Sprickman wrote: I also did a little more digging and noticed that once I start pinging from one of these hosts using large packet sizes, I get about 50-60% packet loss (ie: ping -s 1500 other.vr0.host). If I ping something with a decent card, I get about 30-50% packet loss. There's no packet loss with the default packet size. Anyone else with some vr cards feel like checking this out? I've got a VIA Rhine III card that I can dig out and put in if the data would be of any use/interest etc - FWIW I seem to recall being able to get reasonably close to wire speed when I was using it. I plugged in the card today, and seem to get pretty reasonable performance (8-10MB/s for scp - see attached). The two boxes are plugged into a Linksys router via store made cat5 or cat6 cables. The second box has an Intel PRO 100 (fxp) adapter. Interesting. I've had the vr hosts going through three different switches, patch cables, the in-house cabling, and the issue remains the same. I'd love to just replace a cable and be done with it, but that doesn't seem to be the issue. I can also eliminate it by just switching out cards... so I don't really suspect I've got a whole load of bad cables. Removing the vr card and going back to fxp everywhere seems to provide better performance (e.g. get 9MB/s in the last test), but the vr performance is acceptable (maybe your router clashes with your card?). Mine borders on unusable. The packet loss really slows down and stalls TCP connections. I noticed you have a newer revision of the Via card: # pciconf -lv [EMAIL PROTECTED]:9:0: class=0x02 card=0x14031186 chip=0x31061106 rev=0x86 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT6105M/LOM Rhine III PCI Fast Ethernet Controller' class= network subclass = ethernet This is what I'm dealing with: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:17:7: class=0x06 card=0x287e1106 chip=0x287e1106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' class= bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:18:0: class=0x02 card=0x80a71043 chip=0x30651106 rev=0x7c hdr=0x00vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT6102 Rhine II PCI Fast Ethernet Controller' class= network subclass = ethernet Maybe I'll just round up as much info as I can at my next visit, grab some tcpdumps of the loss from both ends and do a send-pr and hope for the best. I can get along with replacing the cards, but they seem to be really common these days - basically any cheap system with a Via chipset and onboard ethernet will be using some variation on this controller. Charles Cheers Mark ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: vr speed issues
Hi, I'm not sure if I'm much help, I have the same chipset, VIA Rhine II on a 6.1-p10 and works fine on a production server # pciconf -lv [EMAIL PROTECTED]:18:0: class=0x02 card=0x1421147b chip=0x30651106 rev=0x78 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT6102 Rhine II PCI Fast Ethernet Controller' class= network subclass = ethernet The ping -s 1500 other.host works with no packet loss. You chip id looks the same, but the revision looks slightly newer. Cheers David Charles Sprickman wrote: On Fri, 1 Dec 2006, Mark Kirkwood wrote: Mark Kirkwood wrote: Charles Sprickman wrote: I also did a little more digging and noticed that once I start pinging from one of these hosts using large packet sizes, I get about 50-60% packet loss (ie: ping -s 1500 other.vr0.host). If I ping something with a decent card, I get about 30-50% packet loss. There's no packet loss with the default packet size. Anyone else with some vr cards feel like checking this out? I've got a VIA Rhine III card that I can dig out and put in if the data would be of any use/interest etc - FWIW I seem to recall being able to get reasonably close to wire speed when I was using it. I plugged in the card today, and seem to get pretty reasonable performance (8-10MB/s for scp - see attached). The two boxes are plugged into a Linksys router via store made cat5 or cat6 cables. The second box has an Intel PRO 100 (fxp) adapter. Interesting. I've had the vr hosts going through three different switches, patch cables, the in-house cabling, and the issue remains the same. I'd love to just replace a cable and be done with it, but that doesn't seem to be the issue. I can also eliminate it by just switching out cards... so I don't really suspect I've got a whole load of bad cables. Removing the vr card and going back to fxp everywhere seems to provide better performance (e.g. get 9MB/s in the last test), but the vr performance is acceptable (maybe your router clashes with your card?). Mine borders on unusable. The packet loss really slows down and stalls TCP connections. I noticed you have a newer revision of the Via card: # pciconf -lv [EMAIL PROTECTED]:9:0: class=0x02 card=0x14031186 chip=0x31061106 rev=0x86 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT6105M/LOM Rhine III PCI Fast Ethernet Controller' class= network subclass = ethernet This is what I'm dealing with: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:17:7: class=0x06 card=0x287e1106 chip=0x287e1106 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' class= bridge subclass = HOST-PCI [EMAIL PROTECTED]:18:0: class=0x02 card=0x80a71043 chip=0x30651106 rev=0x7c hdr=0x00vendor = 'VIA Technologies Inc' device = 'VT6102 Rhine II PCI Fast Ethernet Controller' class= network subclass = ethernet Maybe I'll just round up as much info as I can at my next visit, grab some tcpdumps of the loss from both ends and do a send-pr and hope for the best. I can get along with replacing the cards, but they seem to be really common these days - basically any cheap system with a Via chipset and onboard ethernet will be using some variation on this controller. Charles Cheers Mark ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: vr speed issues
Charles Sprickman wrote: [snipped] Performace with scp was around 200KB/s, ftp wavered between 300-500KB/s. This did not appear to be a duplex mismatch - unmanaged switch showed them all at 100/Full, put some other hosts on the same ports/cabling and got near wire speed. I just checked with the boxes I have here. One is an Athon XP on a Asus board with a VIA Rhine II on board; the other is a `old' Celeron 500 on a MSI board with a Intel ``Pro 100/S Desktop Adapter''. I transfered a 538MiB file (some old CURRENT snapshot) via sftp. My result: from box one to box two (vr to fxp) I get 2.3MB/s; from box two to box one (fxp to vr) I get 3.1MB/s. The first box is running 6.2-PRERELEASE from 11/18, the Intel box is running 7.0-CURRENT from 11/24. Output of $ dmesg | grep vr vr0: VIA VT6102 Rhine II 10/100BaseTX port 0x8000-0x80ff mem 0xd600-0xd6ff at device 18.0 on pci0 miibus0: MII bus on vr0 and $ dmesg | grep fxp fxp0: Intel 82550 Pro/100 Ethernet port 0xc000-0xc03f mem 0xdd02-0xdd020fff,0xdd00-0xdd01 irq 11 at device 1.0 on pci1 miibus0: MII bus on fxp0 [...] fxp0: Microcode loaded, int_delay: 1000 usec bundle_max: 6 fxp0: Microcode loaded, int_delay: 1000 usec bundle_max: 6 If needed I can provide a full dmesg of both boxes. HTH, Philipp -- www.familie-ost.info/~pj ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: vr speed issues
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006, Philipp Ost wrote: Charles Sprickman wrote: [snipped] Performace with scp was around 200KB/s, ftp wavered between 300-500KB/s. This did not appear to be a duplex mismatch - unmanaged switch showed them all at 100/Full, put some other hosts on the same ports/cabling and got near wire speed. I just checked with the boxes I have here. One is an Athon XP on a Asus board with a VIA Rhine II on board; the other is a `old' Celeron 500 on a MSI board with a Intel ``Pro 100/S Desktop Adapter''. I transfered a 538MiB file (some old CURRENT snapshot) via sftp. My result: from box one to box two (vr to fxp) I get 2.3MB/s; from box two to box one (fxp to vr) I get 3.1MB/s. I also did a little more digging and noticed that once I start pinging from one of these hosts using large packet sizes, I get about 50-60% packet loss (ie: ping -s 1500 other.vr0.host). If I ping something with a decent card, I get about 30-50% packet loss. There's no packet loss with the default packet size. Anyone else with some vr cards feel like checking this out? Thanks, Charles The first box is running 6.2-PRERELEASE from 11/18, the Intel box is running 7.0-CURRENT from 11/24. Output of $ dmesg | grep vr vr0: VIA VT6102 Rhine II 10/100BaseTX port 0x8000-0x80ff mem 0xd600-0xd6ff at device 18.0 on pci0 miibus0: MII bus on vr0 and $ dmesg | grep fxp fxp0: Intel 82550 Pro/100 Ethernet port 0xc000-0xc03f mem 0xdd02-0xdd020fff,0xdd00-0xdd01 irq 11 at device 1.0 on pci1 miibus0: MII bus on fxp0 [...] fxp0: Microcode loaded, int_delay: 1000 usec bundle_max: 6 fxp0: Microcode loaded, int_delay: 1000 usec bundle_max: 6 If needed I can provide a full dmesg of both boxes. HTH, Philipp -- www.familie-ost.info/~pj ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: vr speed issues
On Tue, Nov 28, 2006 at 10:50:17PM -0500, Charles Sprickman wrote: Hi all, I spent some time trying to track down slow tcp performance on a small office switched 100 LAN. We just put in a number of whitebox PCs running FreeBSD 6.1-p2/PC-BSD 1.2 that all have onboard Via Rhine 10/100 ethernet controllers. Performace with scp was around 200KB/s, ftp wavered between 300-500KB/s. This did not appear to be a duplex mismatch - unmanaged switch showed them all at 100/Full, put some other hosts on the same ports/cabling and got near wire speed. I took the cabling out of the equation, the switch, no improvement. The only thing that got me decent performance was putting two hosts back to back with an xover cable. I eventually realized that the only hosts with any speed issues in the office were these boxes with the Via ethernet. Putting an equally cheap DLink (RealTek/rl) in one of them gave me much better performance. At another site, I was dealing with a new intranet server running FreeBSD 6.2-PRE (11/16) on a decent Asus board. This also has an onboard Via Rhine ethernet controller. While pulling some files over from the box it was replacing, I noticed that I was getting only a few hundred KB/s on this box. Before putting it into production, I grabbed a cheap Intel 10/100 card and put that in. Problem solved. So it seems to me like perhaps there's an issue with the vr driver. I noticed it does have some quirks mentioned in the manpage, and I don't see too many changes to the driver in the last year or so. Is there any information I can supply to help debug this? I've got a bunch of these machines around. I can get a tcpdump from both ends during an ftp transfer, and the boxes are mine to toy with after hours. I've posted a dmesg from both boxes (PC-BSD and 6.2-PRE): http://www.bway.net/~spork/6.1p2-dmesg.txt http://www.bway.net/~spork/6.2-dmesg.txt VIA Rhine has severe hardware limitations and you can't expect good performance from the NIC. On Tx side the NIC need 4 bytes aligned mbuf so the driver defragments the mbuf chains with m_defrag(9). On Rx side it strips off CRC with m_devget(9) as the NIC has no way to remove the CRC from the received frame. These m_defrag(9)/ m_devget(9) results in bcopy operation and they nullyfies the advantage of DMA which in trun waste significant CPU cycles. If you are in bad need of getting full 100Mbps speed you could buy a cheap PCI gigabit NIC that is supported by re(4)/sk(4)/stge(4) etc. -- Regards, Pyun YongHyeon ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: vr speed issues
Charles Sprickman wrote: I also did a little more digging and noticed that once I start pinging from one of these hosts using large packet sizes, I get about 50-60% packet loss (ie: ping -s 1500 other.vr0.host). If I ping something with a decent card, I get about 30-50% packet loss. There's no packet loss with the default packet size. Anyone else with some vr cards feel like checking this out? I've got a VIA Rhine III card that I can dig out and put in if the data would be of any use/interest etc - FWIW I seem to recall being able to get reasonably close to wire speed when I was using it. Cheers Mark ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
vr speed issues
Hi all, I spent some time trying to track down slow tcp performance on a small office switched 100 LAN. We just put in a number of whitebox PCs running FreeBSD 6.1-p2/PC-BSD 1.2 that all have onboard Via Rhine 10/100 ethernet controllers. Performace with scp was around 200KB/s, ftp wavered between 300-500KB/s. This did not appear to be a duplex mismatch - unmanaged switch showed them all at 100/Full, put some other hosts on the same ports/cabling and got near wire speed. I took the cabling out of the equation, the switch, no improvement. The only thing that got me decent performance was putting two hosts back to back with an xover cable. I eventually realized that the only hosts with any speed issues in the office were these boxes with the Via ethernet. Putting an equally cheap DLink (RealTek/rl) in one of them gave me much better performance. At another site, I was dealing with a new intranet server running FreeBSD 6.2-PRE (11/16) on a decent Asus board. This also has an onboard Via Rhine ethernet controller. While pulling some files over from the box it was replacing, I noticed that I was getting only a few hundred KB/s on this box. Before putting it into production, I grabbed a cheap Intel 10/100 card and put that in. Problem solved. So it seems to me like perhaps there's an issue with the vr driver. I noticed it does have some quirks mentioned in the manpage, and I don't see too many changes to the driver in the last year or so. Is there any information I can supply to help debug this? I've got a bunch of these machines around. I can get a tcpdump from both ends during an ftp transfer, and the boxes are mine to toy with after hours. I've posted a dmesg from both boxes (PC-BSD and 6.2-PRE): http://www.bway.net/~spork/6.1p2-dmesg.txt http://www.bway.net/~spork/6.2-dmesg.txt Thanks, Charles ___ Charles Sprickman NetEng/SysAdmin Bway.net - New York's Best Internet - www.bway.net [EMAIL PROTECTED] - 212.655.9344 ___ freebsd-stable@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
