Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 14:04:23 +0100 From: Bartosz Giza <gizmen@blurp.pl> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Cc: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: two NIC on 2 core system (scheduling problem) Message-ID: <200810281404.24067.gizmen@blurp.pl> In-Reply-To: <ge6t20$7n1$1@ger.gmane.org> References: <200810281235.53508.gizmen@blurp.pl> <200810281309.58262.bartosz.giza@korbank.pl> <ge6t20$7n1$1@ger.gmane.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Tuesday 28 of October 2008 12:29:54 Ivan Voras napisa=C5=82(a): > Bartosz Giza wrote: > > Tuesday 28 of October 2008 11:49:21 Oleksandr Samoylyk napisa=C5=82(a): > >> Ivan Voras 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! > >> > >> It could be not just a problem with em driver. > >> Firstly, it's good to make profiling and find out what exactly eats > >> CPU time. > > > > Yes, we should make some profiling, but it is quite hard on busy > > production router. When i turn on pooling on em0 card swi1: net is > > using about 3% of cpu. So it is quite big difference between 20% with > > tasq and 3% with polling. > > Is the difference reflected in your system / idle CPU time? (i.e. does > your idle time increase for ~~ 17%?) Yes exactly my idle time is increasing ~17% =46or now i am not using polling But i am preparing the same machine for mu= ch=20 more bussier router and i am not sure that this router with em cards will=20 suffice.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200810281404.24067.gizmen>