In article 20140825213735.ga14...@britannica.bec.de,
Joerg Sonnenberger jo...@britannica.bec.de wrote:
On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 09:09:24PM +, Taylor R Campbell wrote:
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2014 20:02:44 +0200
From: J. Hannken-Illjes hann...@eis.cs.tu-bs.de
Short answer: it is --
On Tue, 26 Aug 2014, Robert Elz wrote:
| memcmp is only supposed to provide the correct sign, not
| the difference.
| true, but that's not what memcmp(9) says.
This is a normal problem with man pages - they're written to
document what the code actually does, then interpreted as a
Hi
ixgb(4) has poor performances, even on latest -current. Here is the
dmesg output:
ixg1 at pci5 dev 0 function 1: Intel(R) PRO/10GbE PCI-Express Network Driver,
Version - 2.3.10
ixg1: clearing prefetchable bit
ixg1: interrupting at ioapic0 pin 9
ixg1: PCI Express Bus: Speed 2.5Gb/s Width x8
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:57:37PM +, Christos Zoulas wrote:
ftp://ftp.supermicro.com/CDR-C2_1.20_for_Intel_C2_platform/Intel/LAN/v15.5/PROXGB/DOCS/SERVER/prform10.htm#Setting_MMRBC
Right, but NetBSD has no tool like Linux's setpci to tweak MMRBC, and if
the BIOS has no setting for it,
On Aug 26, 2:23pm, m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: ixg(4) performances
| On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:57:37PM +, Christos Zoulas wrote:
|
ftp://ftp.supermicro.com/CDR-C2_1.20_for_Intel_C2_platform/Intel/LAN/v15.5/PROXGB/DOCS/SERVER/prform10.htm#Setting_MMRBC
|
|
On Aug 26, 2:42pm, m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: ixg(4) performances
| On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:25:52AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
| I would probably extend pcictl with cfgread and cfgwrite commands.
|
| Sure, once it works I can do that, but a first attempt
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 10:25:52 -0400
From: chris...@zoulas.com (Christos Zoulas)
On Aug 26, 2:23pm, m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: ixg(4) performances
| I see dev/pci/pciio.h has a PCI_IOC_CFGREAD / PCI_IOC_CFGWRITE ioctl,
| does that means Linux's
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 11:13:50AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
I think in the example that was 0xe6. I think the .b means byte access
(I am guessing).
Yes, I came to that conclusion reading pciutils sources. I discovered
they also had a man page explaining that -)
I think that we are only
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 15:40:41 +
From: Taylor R Campbell riastr...@netbsd.org
How about the attached patch? I've been sitting on this for months.
New version with some changes suggested by wiz@.
Index: usr.sbin/pcictl/pcictl.8
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 14:42:55 +
From: Emmanuel Dreyfus m...@netbsd.org
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:25:52AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
I would probably extend pcictl with cfgread and cfgwrite commands.
Sure, once it works I can do that, but a first attempt just
ets
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:25:52AM -0400, Christos Zoulas wrote:
On Aug 26, 2:23pm, m...@netbsd.org (Emmanuel Dreyfus) wrote:
-- Subject: Re: ixg(4) performances
| On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:57:37PM +, Christos Zoulas wrote:
|
Finally, adding cfgread/cfgwrite commands to pcictl seems like a step in
the wrong direction. I know that this is UNIX and we're duty-bound to
give everyone enough rope, but may we reconsider our assisted-suicide
policy just this one time? :-)
How well has blindly poking configuration
On Tue, 26 Aug 2014, David Young wrote:
How well has blindly poking configuration registers worked for us in
the past?
Well, with the part he's using (the 82599, I think) it shouldn't be that
blind. The datasheet has all the registers listed, which is the case for
most of Intel's Ethernet
Hi,
Thank you for reviewing.
(2014/08/26 5:15), Mindaugas Rasiukevicius wrote:
Kengo NAKAHARA k-nakah...@iij.ad.jp wrote:
Sorry, I typo the patch URL.
(2014/08/20 18:06), Kengo NAKAHARA wrote:
and here is the patch
http://knakahara.github.io/patches/netbsd/irq-affinity-initctl.patch
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:17:28PM +, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote:
Hi
ixgb(4) has poor performances, even on latest -current. Here is the
dmesg output:
ixg1 at pci5 dev 0 function 1: Intel(R) PRO/10GbE PCI-Express Network Driver,
Version - 2.3.10
ixg1: clearing prefetchable bit
ixg1:
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 07:03:06PM -0700, Jonathan Stone wrote:
Thor,
The NetBSD TCP stack can't handle 8K payload by page-flipping the payload
and prepending an mbuf for XDR/NFS/TCP/IP headers? Or is the issue the extra
page-mapping for the prepended mbuf?
The issue is allocating the
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 12:44:43 -0500
From: David Young dyo...@pobox.com
Finally, adding cfgread/cfgwrite commands to pcictl seems like a step in
the wrong direction. I know that this is UNIX and we're duty-bound to
give everyone enough rope, but may we reconsider our
Thor,
The NetBSD TCP stack can't handle 8K payload by page-flipping the payload and
prepending an mbuf for XDR/NFS/TCP/IP headers? Or is the issue the extra
page-mapping for the prepended mbuf?
On Tue, 8/26/14, Thor Lancelot Simon t...@panix.com
Thor Lancelot Simon t...@panix.com wrote:
MTU 9000 considered harmful. Use something that fits in 8K with the headers.
It's a minor piece of the puzzle but nonetheless, it's a piece.
mtu 8192 or 8000 does not cause any improvement over mtu 9000.
--
Emmanuel Dreyfus
19 matches
Mail list logo
