From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jan 28 17:15:53 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.FreeBSD.org [8.8.178.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1D71B8B for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 17:15:53 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from vijju.singh@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ee0-f41.google.com (mail-ee0-f41.google.com [74.125.83.41]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5340FD5D for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 17:15:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ee0-f41.google.com with SMTP id c13so1461336eek.28 for ; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 09:15:46 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=PUzE1KzMclt6XBX3ZIqb6acsJR43l1bjylXZtAVXCwQ=; b=ackw17UDOGupNTbPy1nqWdTRo6z7L6gmZ61VepMniwDj6iDrYzuBJZAsEQZDxTxfUK oDRoQEyAarSTcSNgB2KVrRtcst03h5tLP8wY9kyMPnL50Y22Dbu6pa+gDu312TQyOAWs a4XDYGbw2leMr+xAqobhJX+gaePhS+Bd7lTxAK+GfStNSnY6iSe2vZNGZLm/VpwbL09p XXunjkT2rWEjoOdtDfWRZPshcbpyOVFtAN+CEmysJ8Ji/EeKNB3UnTNRvtIbywEqoMMF 1jIGVngkJoJIWJB5NmCeoV0DVokzgfP9KnepKolvMLPXWfUQXfHr86RjGnVpIb4N9uCL IMjA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.14.209.198 with SMTP id s46mr28173574eeo.19.1359393346507; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 09:15:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.223.161.80 with HTTP; Mon, 28 Jan 2013 09:15:46 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20130128070439.GB85353@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> References: <20130128070439.GB85353@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 09:15:46 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: ixgbe & msi/x From: Vijay Singh To: Luigi Rizzo Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: net@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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, 28 Jan 2013 17:15:53 -0000 > just curious, is this happening under behyve or also native, > and is it always occurring or it is occasional ? Native, and it happens when the pps rate is high, even if the aggregate bandwidth is low. > I am asking because with netmap when i tried to exploit interrupt > mitigation (strictly processing incoming traffic only on rx > interrupts) i noticed packet drops even at relatively low rates, > which made me suspect that interrupts were either lost or heavily > delayed. I am running whatever is in the driver (version 2.4.5) by default. Since msi/x isnt enabled by default, I have enabled that. The same test, sustains a *much* higher pps load with legacy interrupts, so I think that the msi/x interrupt setup is missing something. -vijay