Re: ixg(4) performances

2014-08-28 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:57:37PM +, Christos Zoulas wrote: > >I also found this page that tackles the same problem on Linux: > >http://dak1n1.com/blog/7-performance-tuning-intel-10gbe It seems that page describe a slightly different model. Intel 82599 datasheet is available here: http://www.

Re: ixg(4) performances

2014-08-28 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 04:40:25PM +, Taylor R Campbell wrote: > New version with some changes suggested by wiz@. Anyone has objection to this change being committed and pulled up to netbsd-7? -- Emmanuel Dreyfus m...@netbsd.org

Re: ixg(4) performances

2014-08-28 Thread Stephan
What is your test setup? Do you have 2 identical boxes? Does it perform better e.g. on Linux or FreeBSD? If so, you could check how the config registers get set by that particular OS. 2014-08-28 9:26 GMT+02:00 Emmanuel Dreyfus : > On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:57:37PM +, Christos Zoulas wrote: >

RE: ixg(4) performances

2014-08-28 Thread Terry Moore
> Or the performance are constrained by something unrelated. In the blog > post cited above, the poster acheived more than 5 Gb/s before touching > MMRBC, while I am stuck at 2,7 GB/s. Any new idea welcome. The blog post refers to PCI-X, I'm more familiar with PCIe, but the concepts are similar.

Re: ixg(4) performances

2014-08-28 Thread Christos Zoulas
In article <20140828072832.gi8...@homeworld.netbsd.org>, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote: >On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 04:40:25PM +, Taylor R Campbell wrote: >> New version with some changes suggested by wiz@. > >Anyone has objection to this change being committed and pulled up to >netbsd-7? > Not me. c

Re: ixg(4) performances

2014-08-28 Thread Hisashi T Fujinaka
On Thu, 28 Aug 2014, Emmanuel Dreyfus wrote: On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 12:57:37PM +, Christos Zoulas wrote: I also found this page that tackles the same problem on Linux: http://dak1n1.com/blog/7-performance-tuning-intel-10gbe It seems that page describe a slightly different model. Intel 82

Re: ixg(4) performances

2014-08-28 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 08:37:06AM -0700, Hisashi T Fujinaka wrote: > Isn't your PCIe slot constrained? I thought I remembered that you're > only getting 2.5GT/s and I forget what test you're running. I use netperf, and I now get 2.7 Gb/s. -- Emmanuel Dreyfus m...@netbsd.org

Re: RFC: IRQ affinity (aka interrupt routing)

2014-08-28 Thread Mindaugas Rasiukevicius
Matt Thomas wrote: > > As I've been reading this discussion, it seems very x86 centric. > > I've thinking about adding > > void intr_distribute(void *ih, const kcpuset_t *newset, kcpuset_t *oldset) > Agree. And this would be MI interface. Just as Kengo-san already pointed out, MD may want

Re: ixg(4) performances

2014-08-28 Thread Emmanuel Dreyfus
Terry Moore wrote: > There are several possibilities, all revolving about differences between the > blog poster's base system and yorus. Do I have a way to investigate for appropriate PCI setup? Here is what dmesg says about it: pci0 at mainbus0 bus 0: configuration mode 1 pci0: i/o space, memo

Unallocated inode

2014-08-28 Thread Paul Ripke
I'm currently running kernel: NetBSD slave 6.1_STABLE NetBSD 6.1_STABLE (SLAVE) #4: Fri May 23 23:42:30 EST 2014 stix@slave:/home/netbsd/netbsd-6/obj.amd64/home/netbsd/netbsd-6/src/sys/arch/amd64/compile/SLAVE amd64 Built from netbsd-6 branch synced around the build time. Over the last year, I ha