From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Oct 28 11:27:54 2008
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
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 E6CDB106566C
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Tue, 28 Oct 2008 11:27:54 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from dudu@dudu.ro)
Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com (ug-out-1314.google.com [66.249.92.170])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86AA48FC19
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Tue, 28 Oct 2008 11:27:54 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from dudu@dudu.ro)
Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id 30so195885ugs.39
	for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Tue, 28 Oct 2008 04:27:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.103.249.19 with SMTP id b19mr3318389mus.53.1225191350036;
	Tue, 28 Oct 2008 03:55:50 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.103.229.14 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Oct 2008 03:55:50 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <ad79ad6b0810280355w25005d0bs5188a004da11bf50@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 12:55:50 +0200
From: "Vlad GALU" <dudu@dudu.ro>
To: "Ivan Voras" <ivoras@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <4906EC8D.7070503@freebsd.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <200810281235.53508.gizmen@blurp.pl> <4906EC8D.7070503@freebsd.org>
Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, jfvogel@gmail.com
Subject: Re: two NIC on 2 core system (scheduling problem)
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 11:27:55 -0000

On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 12:42 PM, Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> wrote:
> Bartosz Giza wrote:
>
>> Another question is why em0 taskq is eating so much cpu ? BGE interface is
>> actually one that pushes 2 times more packets than em0 and it uses about
>> half cpu comparing to em0. Is that not strange ?
>> Could someone tell my why is this happening ? BGE is faster ? or maybe i can
>> tune some
>
> I have the same problem - em0 taskq eating incredible amounts of CPU. If
> you find a solution, contact me!
>
>
>

Could this be related to the different interrupt handling models?
em(4) uses FILTER, the others use ITHREAD.


-- 
~/.signature: no such file or directory