On Sep 5, 2012, at 4:12 PM, Ezra Kissel wrote:
> On 9/5/2012 3:48 PM, Atchley, Scott wrote:
>> On Sep 5, 2012, at 3:06 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>>
>>> On Wed, 5 Sep 2012, Atchley, Scott wrote:
>>>
> AFAICT the network stack is useful up to 1Gbps and
> after that more and more band-ai
On Wed, 5 Sep 2012, Atchley, Scott wrote:
> > Hmmm... You are running an old kernel. What version of OFED do you
> > use?
>
> Hah, if you think my kernel is old, you should see my userland
> (RHEL5.5). ;-)
My condolences.
> Does the version of OFED impact the kernel modules? I am using the
> mod
On 9/5/2012 3:48 PM, Atchley, Scott wrote:
On Sep 5, 2012, at 3:06 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
On Wed, 5 Sep 2012, Atchley, Scott wrote:
AFAICT the network stack is useful up to 1Gbps and
after that more and more band-aid comes into play.
Hmm, many 10G Ethernet NICs can reach line rate. I
On Wed, 5 Sep 2012, Atchley, Scott wrote:
> With Myricom 10G NICs, for example, you just need one core and it can do
> line rate with 1500 byte MTU. Do you count the stateless offloads as
> band-aids? Or something else?
The stateless aids also have certain limitations. Its a grey zone if you
want
On Sep 5, 2012, at 3:13 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Sep 2012, Atchley, Scott wrote:
>
>> These are Mellanox QDR HCAs (board id is MT_0D90110009). The full output of
>> ibv_devinfo is in my original post.
>
> Hmmm... You are running an old kernel. What version of OFED do you use?
On Sep 5, 2012, at 3:06 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Sep 2012, Atchley, Scott wrote:
>
>>> AFAICT the network stack is useful up to 1Gbps and
>>> after that more and more band-aid comes into play.
>>
>> Hmm, many 10G Ethernet NICs can reach line rate. I have not yet tested any
>> 40
On Sep 5, 2012, at 3:04 PM, Reeted wrote:
> On 09/05/12 19:59, Atchley, Scott wrote:
>> On Sep 5, 2012, at 1:50 PM, Reeted wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I have read that with newer cards the datagram (unconnected) mode is
>>> faster at IPoIB than connected mode. Do you want to check?
>> I have read that the
On Wed, 5 Sep 2012, Atchley, Scott wrote:
> These are Mellanox QDR HCAs (board id is MT_0D90110009). The full output of
> ibv_devinfo is in my original post.
Hmmm... You are running an old kernel. What version of OFED do you use?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe lin
On Wed, 5 Sep 2012, Atchley, Scott wrote:
> > AFAICT the network stack is useful up to 1Gbps and
> > after that more and more band-aid comes into play.
>
> Hmm, many 10G Ethernet NICs can reach line rate. I have not yet tested any
> 40G Ethernet NICs, but I hope that they will get close to line r
On 09/05/12 19:59, Atchley, Scott wrote:
On Sep 5, 2012, at 1:50 PM, Reeted wrote:
I have read that with newer cards the datagram (unconnected) mode is
faster at IPoIB than connected mode. Do you want to check?
I have read that the latency is lower (better) but the bandwidth is lower.
Using
On Sep 5, 2012, at 2:20 PM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Sep 2012, Atchley, Scott wrote:
>
>> # ethtool -k ib0
>> Offload parameters for ib0:
>> rx-checksumming: off
>> tx-checksumming: off
>> scatter-gather: off
>> tcp segmentation offload: off
>> udp fragmentation offload: off
>> generi
On Wed, 5 Sep 2012, Atchley, Scott wrote:
> # ethtool -k ib0
> Offload parameters for ib0:
> rx-checksumming: off
> tx-checksumming: off
> scatter-gather: off
> tcp segmentation offload: off
> udp fragmentation offload: off
> generic segmentation offload: on
> generic-receive-offload: off
>
> Ther
On Sep 5, 2012, at 1:50 PM, Reeted wrote:
> On 08/29/12 21:35, Atchley, Scott wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I am benchmarking a sockets based application and I want a sanity check on
>> IPoIB performance expectations when using connected mode (65520 MTU).
>
> I have read that with newer cards the
On 09/05/12 17:51, Christoph Lameter wrote:
PCI-E on PCI 2.0 should give you up to about 2.3 Gbytes/sec with these
nics. So there is like something that the network layer does to you that
limits the bandwidth.
I think those are 8 lane PCI-e 2.0 so that would be 500MB/sec x 8 that's
4 GBytes/se
On 08/29/12 21:35, Atchley, Scott wrote:
Hi all,
I am benchmarking a sockets based application and I want a sanity check on
IPoIB performance expectations when using connected mode (65520 MTU).
I have read that with newer cards the datagram (unconnected) mode is
faster at IPoIB than conn
On Sep 5, 2012, at 11:51 AM, Christoph Lameter wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Aug 2012, Atchley, Scott wrote:
>
>> I am benchmarking a sockets based application and I want a sanity check
>> on IPoIB performance expectations when using connected mode (65520 MTU).
>> I am using the tuning tips in Documentatio
On Wed, 29 Aug 2012, Atchley, Scott wrote:
> I am benchmarking a sockets based application and I want a sanity check
> on IPoIB performance expectations when using connected mode (65520 MTU).
> I am using the tuning tips in Documentation/infiniband/ipoib.txt. The
> machines have Mellanox QDR cards
On Mon, 12 Apr 2010, Tom Ammon wrote:
| Thanks for the pointer. I thought it was running in connected mode, and
| looking at that variable that you mentioned confirms it:
| [r...@gateway3 ~]# ifconfig ib0
| ib0 Link encap:InfiniBand HWaddr
| 80:00:00:02:FE:80:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:00:0
Dave,
Thanks for the pointer. I thought it was running in connected mode, and
looking at that variable that you mentioned confirms it:
[r...@gateway3 ~]# cat /sys/class/net/ib0/mode
connected
And the IP MTU shows up as:
[r...@gateway3 ~]# ifconfig ib0
ib0 Link encap:InfiniBand HWaddr
On Mon, 12 Apr 2010, Tom Ammon wrote:
| I'm trying to do some performance benchmarking of IPoIB on a DDR IB
| cluster, and I am having a hard time understanding what I am seeing.
|
| When I do a simple netperf, I get results like these:
|
| [r...@gateway3 ~]# netperf -H 192.168.23.252
| TCP STRE
20 matches
Mail list logo
