From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Tue May 11 12:59:51 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F17251065679 for ; Tue, 11 May 2010 12:59:51 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from barney_cordoba@yahoo.com) Received: from web63906.mail.re1.yahoo.com (web63906.mail.re1.yahoo.com [69.147.97.121]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AB6238FC13 for ; Tue, 11 May 2010 12:59:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 10635 invoked by uid 60001); 11 May 2010 12:59:51 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1273582790; bh=RMGwqI1OtH2/hJx297UYwmSUI8J/5Qk3K+cdp2pSuHg=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=m703tIYGYMBy+1XYbmHuowAI6iosVut4dDjv5zgyLtC6R9laW7ZlznsYhEH9lQOxuFt3SeiV91E8wL47uDfQlcnG2PvICAum0OYtxQVeNOzu7yIP38H9iEQTdsGdjeINuAPvfaLOh5MXidquIeitAa3jXnLVCCho1LwE/qX6rg4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.com; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=as/HoNaL7r6fZuAAWDGttECM0J8Jy7d5L0/z7iSGP1m3N9tSRuVWwwUlmWGO1yAYWQ4i9oA/HOcQah/Forgal+H57s8ksiNvDi7XdNXpDqpwJ5PFdMA4BbtZwjitSLDJZwzO1hf7lMlD6AoN1ij+gFFSofNZWRkEZYX8vRpo5HA=; Message-ID: <980105.10457.qm@web63906.mail.re1.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: WFbHVxcVM1legPPiOyyO82PUKAyKxVqDgDMjkTJpo5pQOhe SQ9kdCEFq4ekbLUc9.1_qVA04i3E0LzMcI10KZLSTjkdaVtOEAThCzU4cyyI S0rPn9lqzslIVXH72JF9oMuMiDKWnqjLDOMulm2EO2POCvV4oRU1RyxN5yly k8o_Qb648QqXskAG7F8Z3iE4hG2.d4NugPg3JZ202rGRB82t.aEFUZAnXU6T oOC3wsKbj9I3cTMSMa2pNQr0LAidQW4JUblbJ7cGrbnD8pscVl_1q9khtHO9 dLFxDmVsoXdUt2fv505aGcW2u1OJCJRE- Received: from [98.203.21.152] by web63906.mail.re1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Tue, 11 May 2010 05:59:50 PDT X-Mailer: YahooMailClassic/10.1.11 YahooMailWebService/0.8.103.269680 Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 05:59:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Barney Cordoba To: Jack Vogel In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 11 May 2010 13:10:46 +0000 Cc: Murat Balaban , freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, grarpamp , Vincent Hoffman Subject: Re: Intel 10Gb X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 11 May 2010 12:59:52 -0000 =0A=0A--- On Sun, 5/9/10, Jack Vogel wrote:=0A=0A> From= : Jack Vogel =0A> Subject: Re: Intel 10Gb=0A> To: "Barne= y Cordoba" =0A> Cc: "Murat Balaban" , freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, "grarpa= mp" , "Vincent Hoffman" =0A> Date: = Sunday, May 9, 2010, 1:12 PM=0A> On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 6:43 AM,=0A> Barney= Cordoba wrote:=0A> =0A> >=0A> >=0A> > --- On Sat= , 5/8/10, Murat Balaban =0A> wrote:=0A> >=0A> > > From= : Murat Balaban =0A> > > Subject: Re: Intel 10Gb=0A> >= > To: "Vincent Hoffman" =0A> > > Cc: freebsd-net@freeb= sd.org,=0A> freebsd-performance@freebsd.org,=0A> "grarpamp"=0A> > =0A> > > Date: Saturday, May 8, 2010, 8:59 AM=0A> > >=0A> > > Mu= ch of the FreeBSD networking stack has been=0A> made parallel=0A> > > in or= der to=0A> > > cope with high packet rates at 10 Gig/sec=0A> operation.=0A>= > >=0A> > > I've seen good numbers (near 10 Gig) in my tests=0A> involving= =0A> > > TCP/UDP=0A> > > send/receive. (latest Intel driver).=0A> > >=0A> >= > As far as BPF is concerned, above statement does=0A> not hold=0A> > > tr= ue,=0A> > > since there is some work that needs to be done=0A> here in=0A> = > > terms=0A> > > of BPF locking and parallelism. My tests show=0A> that th= ere=0A> > > is a high lock contention around "bpf interface=0A> lock",=0A> = > > resulting=0A> > > in input errors at high packet rates and with=0A> man= y bpf=0A> > > devices.=0A> > >=0A> > > I belive GSoC 2010 project, Multique= ue BPF, is a=0A> milestone=0A> > > for this:=0A> > > http://www.freebsd.org= /projects/ideas/ideas.html#p-multiqbpf=0A> > >=0A> > > I'm also working on = this problem myself and will=0A> post a=0A> > > diff whenever=0A> > > I hav= e something usable.=0A> > >=0A> > >=0A> > > --=0A> > > Murat=0A> > > http:/= /www.enderunix.org/murat/=0A> > >=0A> > >=0A> > >=0A> > > On Sat, 2010-05-0= 8 at 10:01 +0100, Vincent=0A> Hoffman=0A> > >=0A> > >=A0 wrote:=0A> > > > L= ooks a little like=0A> > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-all= /2010-May/023679.html=0A> > > > but for intel. cool.=0A> > > >=0A> > > > Vi= nce=0A> > > > On 07/05/2010 23:01, grarpamp wrote:=0A> > > > > Just wonderi= ng in general these days=0A> how close=0A> > > FreeBSD is to=0A> > > > > fu= ll 10Gb rates at various packet sizes=0A> from=0A> > > minimum ethernet=0A>= > > > > frame to max jumbo 65k++. For things=0A> like BPF,=0A> > > ipfw/pf= , routing,=0A> > > > > switching, etc.=0A> > > > > http://www.ntop.org/blog= /?p=3D86=0A> > > > >=0A> _______________________________________________=0A= > >=0A> > Blah, Blah, Blah. Let's see some real numbers on real=0A> network= s under=0A> > real loads. Until then, you've got nothing.=0A> >=0A> > BC=0A= > >=0A> >=0A> >=0A> Blah blah blah, you're one to talk, do you EVER do anyt= hing=0A> but=0A> criticize others? Nothing is right.=0A> =0A> Jack=0A=0ATho= se who expect pats on the back for not getting the job done have no=0Achanc= e of succeeding. Without criticism you only have delusion.=0A=0AI'm not cri= ticizing the work, even though its worthy of criticism. I'm =0Acriticizing = touting successes without any real-world evidence to support=0Athe claim.= =0A=0ABC=0A=0A=0A