Re: Packet passing performance study on exotic hardware.

2004-10-08 Thread David Gilbert
> "Mike" == Mike Tancsa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Mike> At 12:18 PM 08/10/2004, David Gilbert wrote: >> Idle_poll is default 1, I'm not positive we tested 0. I don't >> think there is much idle time here. Mike> Actually, on RELENG_5, I think the default is now zero. checked, tho. We did

Re: Packet passing performance study on exotic hardware.

2004-10-08 Thread David Gilbert
> "Julian" == Julian Elischer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Julian> David Gilbert wrote: Julian> there are also changes in B4->B7 that ar related to scheduling Julian> the packet delivery mechanisms.. They may not make much of a Julian> difference but... I will endevour to do cvsup and retest

Re: Packet passing performance study on exotic hardware.

2004-10-08 Thread Mike Tancsa
At 12:18 PM 08/10/2004, David Gilbert wrote: Idle_poll is default 1, I'm not positive we tested 0. I don't think there is much idle time here. Actually, on RELENG_5, I think the default is now zero. With a releng_5 BETA7 box in between 2 other hosts, with idle_poll set to the default on zero, usi

Re: Packet passing performance study on exotic hardware.

2004-10-08 Thread Julian Elischer
David Gilbert wrote: "Scott" == Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Scott> Interesting results. One thing to note is that a severe bug in Scott> the if_em driver was fixed for BETA7. The symptoms of this bug Scott> include apparent livelock of the machine during heavy xmit Scott>

RE: Packet passing performance study on exotic hardware.

2004-10-08 Thread David Gilbert
> "Daniel" == Daniel Eriksson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Daniel> David Gilbert wrote: >> Right out of the box, FreeBSD 5.3 (with polling) passed about 200 >> kpps. Daniel> Was this with debug.mpsafenet enabled and all debugging Daniel> (WITNESS and such) turned off? mpsafenet on and all wit

Re: Packet passing performance study on exotic hardware.

2004-10-08 Thread David Gilbert
> "Mike" == Mike Tancsa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Mike> At 10:08 AM 08/10/2004, David Gilbert wrote: >> Right out of the box, FreeBSD 5.3 (with polling) passed about 200 >> kpps. net.isr.enable=1 increased that without polling to about 220 Mike> Did you have kern.polling.idle_poll at 0 or

Re: Packet passing performance study on exotic hardware.

2004-10-08 Thread David Gilbert
> "Guy" == Guy Helmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Guy> The fixed bug in the em driver for BETA7 may significantly help Guy> (see Scott Long's response prior to mine). As I replied, I hand-applied these patches. They reduced live lock (or what my tech calls "chunkyness" --- almost live lock),

RE: Packet passing performance study on exotic hardware.

2004-10-08 Thread Daniel Eriksson
David Gilbert wrote: > Right out of the box, FreeBSD 5.3 (with polling) passed about 200 > kpps. Was this with debug.mpsafenet enabled and all debugging (WITNESS and such) turned off? /Daniel Eriksson ___ [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list http://lists.f

Re: Packet passing performance study on exotic hardware.

2004-10-08 Thread Mike Tancsa
At 10:08 AM 08/10/2004, David Gilbert wrote: Right out of the box, FreeBSD 5.3 (with polling) passed about 200 kpps. net.isr.enable=1 increased that without polling to about 220 Did you have kern.polling.idle_poll at 0 or 1 ? In my tests a few weeks ago this seemed to make a difference, but the l

Re: Packet passing performance study on exotic hardware.

2004-10-08 Thread Andre Oppermann
David Gilbert wrote: During the next week, I will continue testing with full simulated routing tables, random packets and packets between 350 and 550 bytes (average ISP out/in packet sizes). I will add to this report then. If anyone has tuning advice for FreeBSD 5.3, I'd like to hear it. Three thi

Re: Packet passing performance study on exotic hardware.

2004-10-08 Thread Guy Helmer
David Gilbert wrote: The opportunity presented itelf for me to test packet passing ability on some fairly exotic hardware. The motherboard I really wanted to test not only had separate memory busses for each cpu, but also had two separate PCI-X busses (one slot each). To this, I added two intel p

Re: Packet passing performance study on exotic hardware.

2004-10-08 Thread David Gilbert
> "Scott" == Scott Long <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: Scott> Interesting results. One thing to note is that a severe bug in Scott> the if_em driver was fixed for BETA7. The symptoms of this bug Scott> include apparent livelock of the machine during heavy xmit Scott> load. You might want to up

Re: Packet passing performance study on exotic hardware.

2004-10-08 Thread Scott Long
David Gilbert wrote: The opportunity presented itelf for me to test packet passing ability on some fairly exotic hardware. The motherboard I really wanted to test not only had separate memory busses for each cpu, but also had two separate PCI-X busses (one slot each). To this, I added two intel p

Packet passing performance study on exotic hardware.

2004-10-08 Thread David Gilbert
The opportunity presented itelf for me to test packet passing ability on some fairly exotic hardware. The motherboard I really wanted to test not only had separate memory busses for each cpu, but also had two separate PCI-X busses (one slot each). To this, I added two intel pro/1000 gigabit ether