From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Wed Jan 18 09:52:12 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FCE1CB47BA; Wed, 18 Jan 2017 09:52:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hps@selasky.org) Received: from mail.turbocat.net (turbocat.net [88.99.82.50]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2B8E310FF; Wed, 18 Jan 2017 09:52:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from hps@selasky.org) Received: from hps2016.home.selasky.org (unknown [62.141.129.119]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.turbocat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 660791FE025; Wed, 18 Jan 2017 10:51:52 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: decent 40G network adapters To: "Eugene M. Zheganin" , freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-stable , Meny Yossefi References: <587F39E3.1060608@norma.perm.ru> From: Hans Petter Selasky Message-ID: <59b43877-5194-20bc-27b5-486f7f449cf7@selasky.org> Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 10:51:36 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.4.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <587F39E3.1060608@norma.perm.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jan 2017 09:52:12 -0000 On 01/18/17 10:48, Eugene M. Zheganin wrote: > Hi. > > Could someone recommend a decent 40Gbit adapter that are proven to be > working under FreeBSD ? The intended purpose - iSCSI traffic, not much > pps, but rates definitely above 10G. I've tried Supermicro-manufactured > Intel XL710 ones (two boards, different servers - same sad story: > packets loss, server unresponsive, spikes), seems like they have a > problem in a driver (or firmware), and though Intel support states this > is because the Supermicro tampered with the adapter, I'm still > suspicious about ixl(4). I've also seen in the ML a guy reported the > exact same problem with ixl(4) as I have found. > > So, what would you say ? Chelsio ? > Hi, I think also the Mellanox, mlx4 and mlx5 drivers will support this. Are you using infiniband or TCP for backend? --HPS