Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 11:33:52 -0700 From: Jason Wolfe <nitroboost@gmail.com> To: Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org> Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Konstantin Kulikov <k.kulikov2@gmail.com>, Vitalii Duk <mlevel.ars@gmail.com> Subject: Re: Unbalanced LACP link Message-ID: <CAAAm0r1MRcJgQq=fA646tioqoWvXRKrXkExH56HjDNoETNi3_Q@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5506A5BB.5060204@selasky.org> References: <CAH6gFOnpQ9LrpuWOe6w2nQ42Yz%2BhKSoy4WcBOTSEOkMMxnV8sA@mail.gmail.com> <CAD%2BeXGRB4BD7xRL14KkLo-7uMWWEwZx97Y01g4dywR3-KGmTuA@mail.gmail.com> <CAH6gFOkksMYMt8bKh6=eytb9KcbM=1CEpsztFqR%2BSZ5PvXcahw@mail.gmail.com> <5506A5BB.5060204@selasky.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Mar 16, 2015 at 2:43 AM, Hans Petter Selasky <hps@selasky.org> wrote: > On 03/16/15 10:37, Vitalii Duk wrote: >> >> I've changed use_flowid to 0 and it helped! But isn't it setting >> significant? In a description it says "Shift flowid bits to prevent >> multiqueue collisions". > > > Hi, > > Maybe your ethernet hardware is not properly setting the m_flowid ... > > --HPS > Flip use_flowid back to 1 and try setting net.link.lagg.default_flowid_shift / net.link.lagg.X.flowid_shift to 0 as Hiren suggested. r260179 added this shift, which has caused us balancing issues with the i350/igb. https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base?view=revision&revision=260179 Based on Adrian's comment about igb/ixgbe not setting the 'full flowid' under normal conditions, does that mean this shift should be 0 by default to ensure we don't break balancing for devices that only set the CPU/MSIX queue? Jason
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAAAm0r1MRcJgQq=fA646tioqoWvXRKrXkExH56HjDNoETNi3_Q>