From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Nov 14 03:16:15 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FDFC106566B for ; Sat, 14 Nov 2009 03:16:15 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from pyunyh@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qy0-f176.google.com (mail-qy0-f176.google.com [209.85.221.176]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB2DD8FC13 for ; Sat, 14 Nov 2009 03:16:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qyk6 with SMTP id 6so1789818qyk.3 for ; Fri, 13 Nov 2009 19:16:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:received:from:date:to:cc :subject:message-id:reply-to:references:mime-version:content-type :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=epLVo7Cfj4HKkOsRnXjDALTaJIyHpQsDm2hmcfkzk5s=; b=dRYiECrjctnaKbYVMiP8g43IMagTyjt6UlQNu6GDcqwOhvD38p37qyoQFupHr/HrE1 FeFzfafAMcAfmFOIj8PvzQqmHe8oJL84gzwETfb6Wof1TdOdIlNmcsZmsA6lxgY+TatT 2GsLqnmLXYem0VQXsdwpzPuPu/lpXsNnK988s= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=ZSiIR0x1b0W2jkMhhc00hf3HqlC48m9BIYbCoDm0nKEf2oYFy3cAvctYZouO48F3XK udB/l5QwRX3lxUzlVEjmNS8YKHRN2mvuaVXaqxGeoK0itXdU4eBBYz5HAPsLrsH9d5Mv qXpGzTzyQ5Hd4wrzMa8A3MMPn/1khLXSpphTk= Received: by 10.224.13.204 with SMTP id d12mr3369342qaa.171.1258168574179; Fri, 13 Nov 2009 19:16:14 -0800 (PST) Received: from pyunyh@gmail.com ([174.35.1.224]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 20sm1830405qyk.1.2009.11.13.19.16.12 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 13 Nov 2009 19:16:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by pyunyh@gmail.com (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 13 Nov 2009 19:15:43 -0800 From: Pyun YongHyeon Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 19:15:43 -0800 To: d@delphij.net Message-ID: <20091114031543.GO15449@michelle.cdnetworks.com> References: <20091111223751.GE15449@michelle.cdnetworks.com> <4AFDD544.10302@delphij.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4AFDD544.10302@delphij.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.3i Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Call for bge(4) testers X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: pyunyh@gmail.com List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 03:16:15 -0000 On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 01:53:08PM -0800, Xin LI wrote: [...] > > I'm interesting in performance changes before/after the diff and > > any regressions from the diff. Please test I'll commit the diff > > next week unless I get regressions. > > So far I have not seen regressions after bge.tso.1111-1.diff . I have > not done any benchmarks though, never imagined my laptop is equipped > with TSO :) > > [delphij@delta] /usr/src/sys/net> ifconfig bge0 > bge0: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500 > options=19b > AFAIK bge(4) was the only driver that lacks TSO support for TSO capable hardwares.(I'm not sure whether et(4) controllers also have TSO capability though) You may notice better TCP bulk transfer performance as well as lower CPU load. Thanks for testing!