From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Nov  6 19:18:36 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88E8EA39;
 Wed,  6 Nov 2013 19:18:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jhb@freebsd.org)
Received: from bigwig.baldwin.cx (bigwig.baldwin.cx [IPv6:2001:470:1f11:75::1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5DF042657;
 Wed,  6 Nov 2013 19:18:36 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from jhbbsd.localnet (unknown [209.249.190.124])
 by bigwig.baldwin.cx (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5C0EFB9CA;
 Wed,  6 Nov 2013 14:18:35 -0500 (EST)
From: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [10-STABLE,
 11-CURRENT] something wrong between cam and eventtimer or geom and
 eventtimer
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2013 12:29:00 -0500
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (FreeBSD/8.4-CBSD-20130906; KDE/4.5.5; amd64; ; )
References: <CAPjTQNF5Q=sPaTSpjnwpVOjiM9e70T0ve-GQ71Sv0zHx_Az7dg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPjTQNEhru6xjzum1qBTnJgKgoRCigSbybdi49+WoLoq563Sng@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAPjTQNHnngQWKPYYH7F+U+pLvkxZxz4cJhDFTzHDLPbKWcxing@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAPjTQNHnngQWKPYYH7F+U+pLvkxZxz4cJhDFTzHDLPbKWcxing@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201311061229.01023.jhb@freebsd.org>
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7
 (bigwig.baldwin.cx); Wed, 06 Nov 2013 14:18:35 -0500 (EST)
Cc: Davide Italiano <davide@freebsd.org>, Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>,
 FreeBSD Stable Mailing List <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>,
 "current@freebsd.org" <current@freebsd.org>, Alexander Motin <mav@freebsd.org>,
 Oliver Pinter <oliver.pntr@gmail.com>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
 <freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-current>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
 <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2013 19:18:36 -0000

On Tuesday, November 05, 2013 3:14:22 pm Oliver Pinter wrote:
> hmm, and seems like, the bottleneck are not in geom or cam, but in em
> driver or in networking stack
> 
> the scenario is:
> 
> A machine: dd if=/dev/ada1 bs=1M | nc -l 9999
> B machine: nc IP 9999 | dd of=/dev/null bs=1M
> 
> hmm, when dd-ing from /dev/zero and switch back to idletick to 0, then
> the performance of network dropped from 113MByte/s to 70+/-15 MByte/s
> 
> machdep.idle_mwait=1/0 has no effect
> machdep.idle=htl has no effect

machdep.idle=hlt is the same thing as only using C1 (C1 is just
the 'hlt' instruction).  Try machdep.idle=spin perhaps?

-- 
John Baldwin