From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 3 23:34:41 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CF51E106566C for ; Tue, 3 May 2011 23:34:41 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lacombar@gmail.com) Received: from mail-iy0-f182.google.com (mail-iy0-f182.google.com [209.85.210.182]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F7728FC12 for ; Tue, 3 May 2011 23:34:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iyj12 with SMTP id 12so705612iyj.13 for ; Tue, 03 May 2011 16:34:41 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=32IrOl6X5vbwWTpc5nwyOM7h+5KPMUVV9EZvzx3UMis=; b=K7onH9R4B24yQI8X1aeXIKdFprnXun93Xib4sKHB3LWuY/q1RQ4CdLkSnoViEDc2xE 2uOnPDLFOtRz7OJMzjD9bc98TzkJ6adk87hMLKWFB+vxKkD1lfSxTJFz3r7Y2qAVmG1Z zhMFeO538n376ZbrmQoHd9uXmssi6ZGFxNrUU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=MsC3mFo6CiWYXRWeKrEMylYfnQkfe0nUEWdh2RwmsGamJxb1XC2zxCacE5yQfu/cYs /ADkF2Lyld3fXFPEowSgbyYD2kL9kb+LX4mZnIEHl/eh9R57zTVXzpVSOLfHdhzq5fC/ sRatnra/OECW9dP5bdTe/EWD6PePYFjm/12F4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.42.162.196 with SMTP id z4mr737350icx.2.1304464277648; Tue, 03 May 2011 16:11:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.42.167.5 with HTTP; Tue, 3 May 2011 16:11:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4D94A354.9080903@sentex.net> <4DC07013.9070707@gmx.net> <4DC078BD.9080908@gmx.net> Date: Tue, 3 May 2011 19:11:17 -0400 Message-ID: From: Arnaud Lacombe To: Jack Vogel Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: Olivier Smedts , FreeBSD current mailing list , Michael Schmiedgen , Mike Tancsa Subject: Re: problems with em(4) since update to driver 7.2.2 X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 03 May 2011 23:34:42 -0000 Hi Jack, On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 6:00 PM, Jack Vogel wrote: > It has nothing to do with load, it has to do with the prerequisites to in= it > your interfaces. > The amount you need is fixed, it doesn't vary with load. Every RX descrip= tor > needs one, > so its simple math, number-of-interfaces X number-of-queues X size of the > ring. > I guess the question is more: why would I need N*M (M > 1) nmbclusters with driver version X when driver version X-1 worked perfectly fine, from my daily-average-user point of view, with N nmbclusters ? A more rude version might be "Why the frak my network adapter stopped working with the default setting ?" :) - Arnaud > If you have other network interfaces beside Intel they also consume mbufs > remember. > > Jack > > > > On Tue, May 3, 2011 at 2:50 PM, Michael Schmiedgen wr= ote: > >> On 03.05.2011 23:24, Jack Vogel wrote: >> >>> If you get the setup receive structures fail, then increase the >>> nmbclusters. >>> >>> If you use standard MTU then what you need are mbufs, and standard size >>> clusters (2K). >>> Only when you use jumbo frames will you need larger. >>> >>> You must configure enough, its that simple. >>> >> >> I doubled the nmbclusters as well. But nothing happened. >> >> I have no load on this machine and nothing special >> configured. >> >> Thanks, >> =A0Michael >> > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org= " >