From owner-freebsd-mips@FreeBSD.ORG Thu May 29 16:24:56 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-mips@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 ESMTPS id 92E5F953; Thu, 29 May 2014 16:24:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qg0-x235.google.com (mail-qg0-x235.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c04::235]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42EBC2B7A; Thu, 29 May 2014 16:24:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qg0-f53.google.com with SMTP id f51so1648217qge.26 for ; Thu, 29 May 2014 09:24:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=a+YHNInwXW8ZiLaCnrpCP+JI1vGn8fe3AZ2he1FBclU=; b=L12jS19fnz3H67ER8FAO30g6H8H/hGOn+NJa2rdqyCymBVhKJA7CCFkUpCSScPaGto IHMPr3JJonyjAZ8mzsIp6X+UcX1IgCwsp4SRUc0KWS9My6nfb8gGH4zqcNTIfZLaQzf5 nvIRENZX28dTUAZy43QoqMAdSNm4DpHedcim6qSTZYU8nH27FwlYzzcv4tSJDPCqUsBl u1exsvkyt4qtJQcipnOi/5rJlMeO714z904eG8tpu/jkKQc7F0s4wrL/PKT0V7kW5Rk4 GHpFbiYWAYsreiq+7q7rACj3S/ifWQxkVrQGFkB2cqpP9/deI8BCLBGVrQVvYWMIi+f1 wTOg== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.224.49.67 with SMTP id u3mr11665635qaf.63.1401380695409; Thu, 29 May 2014 09:24:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.140.43.245 with HTTP; Thu, 29 May 2014 09:24:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 13:24:55 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Are there any hardcoded limits on octeon ethernet module? From: Cesar Fazan To: Juli Mallett Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.18 Cc: "freebsd-mips@FreeBSD.org" X-BeenThere: freebsd-mips@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting FreeBSD to MIPS List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 16:24:56 -0000 Hello Juli, Thanks for the explanation. Unfortunately that fix is beyond my knowledge. While I have suggested to Ubiquiti sponsor some fixes for FreeBSD, I don't think they will. So I guess we have to wait for someone with spare time and patient to do it ... Thanks. Cesar On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 11:56 PM, Juli Mallett wrote: > Cesar, > > On Wed, May 28, 2014 at 7:47 PM, Cesar Fazan wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> While testing the network performance of FreeBSD 10 running on EdgeRouter >> Lite I noticed that kernel{octe taskq_0/1} can't use more than 50% of the >> cpu. >> >> Are there any hardcoded limiting this? >> > > There's no hard-coded limits, but there are some deficiencies in the > current driver, particularly with regard to its ability to moderate > interrupts and process packets in batches. Linux performs better because > of NAPI, which is more suited to the kind of batch processing that Octeon > wants. FreeBSD's DEVICE_POLLING would be better, but the committed driver > lacks support for it, though I can probably dig up some old patches I did > as a proof-of-concept for it. The right fix is for someone with a lot of > patience to get interrupt moderation working, and then to handle batch > processing correctly. There's no tunables or anything you should work with > here, it's a matter of needed changes to the kernel driver. > > Thanks, > Juli. >