From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 4 13:01:18 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B12B01065697 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 13:01:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from barney_cordoba@yahoo.com) Received: from web63902.mail.re1.yahoo.com (web63902.mail.re1.yahoo.com [69.147.97.117]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5DE478FC16 for ; Mon, 4 Jan 2010 13:01:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 14082 invoked by uid 60001); 4 Jan 2010 13:01:13 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.com; s=s1024; t=1262610073; bh=NUSbWTlOqei6S1KjbpG0B28+Qh7OwH/7N22fBf7A0BQ=; 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=EpUTeNEVQAm7QXEbMzwPLZGBAbw0uZDnIK14uxbHYAiWuaAoWkZtPJ0dmLYUfqiId4gK2Weij9hoxnae1kpXkutfwF/NSwoB3xdqaF9jngg3E9YR3itZdoQDSclGmw+hkCJq3RYZddl/zmbaH0ScLT1oKHaeK+JrjeOqT3EE5p0= 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=iQ1wXetZE0YyRBUB2HOdD7K3EpH4BDP1LLd4Pk2mf/pwwm0vdaMO1hLLuXpIrRDKttNO0fceWdGvpvuqYG6VcD1KbRNvtJJNZHd7C6vWi5UG/Hyjo5thLCzq/ZndO6F1JtU03YXcKgr9hOADSlR3XlPGJ14Twm4r/5cC+M0GHE4=; Message-ID: <488554.13788.qm@web63902.mail.re1.yahoo.com> X-YMail-OSG: 2.xj_CYVM1m7yw0k1y6lJCWSUyI8_Uv96nlmh84_DNn.LdjufjBbbiA7Ik4REjXCPUE1YkyuDeutvq0.szNrer0wmuFqvYxC4Tc3ib29pitEntxrsiUPPgACOKVaDl8aVNSEU4RL6De5mGYNnhvxtoJBZDBNBYzESy_3BnlA8Fv1PvgKYXa3AE.YohxR4svxYOXo0gGnUPm2woQgcZoH5afq9EL0NWuWR4lTPe10g7.JUf2VTi37P0I0riFiOcKOTZ8iOgX82YY8lsKMFvHFhA3pUa2aQ.sQOMARI58hhBlJ97NYyAwgd3PByvI- Received: from [98.203.21.152] by web63902.mail.re1.yahoo.com via HTTP; Mon, 04 Jan 2010 05:01:13 PST X-Mailer: YahooMailClassic/9.0.20 YahooMailWebService/0.8.100.260964 Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 05:01:13 -0800 (PST) From: Barney Cordoba To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Michael_T=FCxen?= In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Mike Tancsa Subject: Re: igb interrupt moderation X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2010 13:01:18 -0000 =0A=0A--- On Sun, 1/3/10, Michael T=FCxen wrote:=0A=0A> From: Michael T=FCxen =0A= > Subject: Re: igb interrupt moderation=0A> To: "Barney Cordoba" =0A> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, "Mike Tancsa" =0A> Date: Sunday, January 3, 2010, 1:33 PM=0A> On Jan 3, 2010, at 6:= 35 PM, Barney=0A> Cordoba wrote:=0A> =0A> > --- On Sun, 1/3/10, Michael T= =FCxen =0A> wrote:=0A> > =0A> >> From: Mi= chael T=FCxen =0A> >> Subject: Re: igb in= terrupt moderation=0A> >> To: "Barney Cordoba" = =0A> >> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org,=0A> "Mike Tancsa" =0A= > >> Date: Sunday, January 3, 2010, 12:14 PM=0A> >> On Jan 3, 2010, at 6:00= PM, Barney=0A> >> Cordoba wrote:=0A> >> =0A> >>> =0A> >>> =0A> >>> --- On = Sun, 1/3/10, Michael T=FCxen =0A> >> wrot= e:=0A> >>> =0A> >>>> From: Michael T=FCxen =0A> >>>> Subject: Re: igb interrupt moderation=0A> >>>> To: "Mike Tancsa= " =0A> >>>> Cc: "Barney Cordoba" ,=0A> >> jfvogel@gmail.com,=0A> >> freebsd-net@freebsd.org=0A> >>>> Date: = Sunday, January 3, 2010, 11:38 AM=0A> >>>> On Jan 3, 2010, at 5:23 PM, Mike= =0A> >>>> Tancsa wrote:=0A> >>>> =0A> >>>>> At 11:13 AM 1/3/2010, Michael T= =FCxen=0A> wrote:=0A> >>>>>>> =0A> >>>>>>> Just a separate datapoint=0A> ab= out this=0A> >> driver,=0A> >>>> unless I apply=0A> >>>>>>> =0A> >>>>>>> ht= tp://people.freebsd.org/~yongari/igb/igb.buf.patch6=0A> >>>>>>> =0A> >>>>>>= > the driver is not really=0A> usable for me=0A> >> in=0A> >>>> RELENG_8 on= the dual port version of the=0A> card=0A> >>>>>> Could you elaborate on wh= at you=0A> mean by=0A> >> "not=0A> >>>> really usable"?=0A> >>>>> =0A> >>>>= > =0A> >>>>> Hi,=0A> >>>>>=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0=0A> Some=0A> >> link state is= sues=0A> >>>> (getting confused about what port is up),=0A> problems=0A> >>= at high=0A> >>>> packet rates.=A0 I dont have this card=0A> in=0A> >> prod= uction, but=0A> >>>> in my test environment it was much more=0A> stable on= =0A> >> RELENG_8=0A> >>>> with the above patch in that I was not=0A> able t= o=0A> >> wedge the=0A> >>>> box.=A0 pps rates were pretty ok on a=0A> low e= nd=0A> >> i7 as=0A> >>>> well.=0A> >>>> Thanks for the information. I'll gi= ve it a=0A> try. I=0A> >> have a=0A> >>>> problem when I flood=0A> >>>> a s= ystem with SCTP INITs. The system under=0A> attack=0A> >> becomes=0A> >>>> = completely unresponsive=0A> >>>> on the console. However, it continues to= =0A> send=0A> >> INIT-ACKs=0A> >>>> back. After the last=0A> >>>> commit fr= om Jack it recovers after the=0A> attack. Not=0A> >> yet sure=0A> >>>> what= is going on.=0A> >>>> Using the em driver does not have the=0A> problem.= =0A> >> However,=0A> >>>> when using the em=0A> >>>> driver only one core i= s fully used, when=0A> using the=0A> >> igb=0A> >>>> driver both cores are = fully=0A> >>>> used. Unfortunately I do not have a more=0A> than dual=0A> >= > core=0A> >>>> machine available for=0A> >>>> this testing...=0A> >>> =0A>= >>> Try em and lower the interrupt moderation to=0A> something=0A> >> like= 500 (about=0A> >>> 100 packets per int is good). The latency=0A> isn't goi= ng=0A> >> to be noticable and=0A> >>> you'll see your cpu burden reduced qu= ite a=0A> bit. =0A> >> I'll try. Thanks.=0A> >>> =0A> >>> Are you using a s= ingle NIC on a server, or do=0A> you have=0A> >> a firewall or=0A> >>> brid= ge?=0A> >> The system is a sender/receiver for SCTP. I'm=0A> interested in= =0A> >> the 82576=0A> >> since it provides checksum offloading for it. I=0A= > use one or=0A> >> two ports=0A> >> for simultaneous data transfer. The ca= rds using=0A> the em=0A> >> driver do=0A> >> not support this feature. So I= 'm trying to verify=0A> that the=0A> >> performance=0A> >> goes up when usi= ng hardware checksum. But under=0A> attack,=0A> >> this is currently=0A> >>= not the case... =0A> >>> =0A> >>> Barney=0A> > =0A> > I usually try to fin= d something that actually works=0A> before I worry=0A> > about special feat= ures. But we all work differently.=0A> ... I want to make sure that the SCT= P stuff works. So=0A> others=0A> can "just use it". SCTP checksum offloadin= g is one=0A> important=0A> feature...=0A> > =0A> > Barney=0A> > =0A=0AIt ju= st seems a bit silly to worry about saving a few cpu cycles=0Aon checksum o= ffload when the general driver design is wholly =0Ainefficient and unsuitab= le for production. =0A=0ABarney=0A=0A=0A