Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2014 13:49:22 +0200 From: Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de> To: Niu Zhixiong <kaiaixi@gmail.com> Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>, John-Mark Gurney <jmg@funkthat.com>, "Eggert, Lars" <lars@netapp.com>, Bill Yuan <bycn82@gmail.com> Subject: Re: A problem on TCP in High RTT Environment. Message-ID: <CB687875-FB0A-448D-A4E2-EA9D3E693DAF@lurchi.franken.de> In-Reply-To: <CAOENNMBx8msvwvtN-YqRFb9Y9YGoYcvoSrDi98=qXUcvs64xJg@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAOENNMA_CiBDJc0kchzUbTcf_JBwTJPF=PdBAUB6FPo-KzYkeQ@mail.gmail.com> <20140809184232.GF83475@funkthat.com> <8AE1AC56-D52F-4F13-AAA3-BB96042B37DD@lurchi.franken.de> <20140809204500.GG83475@funkthat.com> <3F6BC212-4223-4AAC-8668-A27075DC55C2@lurchi.franken.de> <CAOENNMCPuiYS7LHwMfOczhZ4yisjGkpOmWzv2pcAoi9Hhzb7dw@mail.gmail.com> <20140810022350.GI83475@funkthat.com> <CAOENNMB3=FZx5kSHVPDPBTtMKbmYJ=c_XNMcuYuoLPe=6U%2Bkxg@mail.gmail.com> <CAOENNMARg36KH1Y%2B0wG8pd7sSf8XKnMf6g790_KiKaj3Mdwyjw@mail.gmail.com> <20140810033212.GL83475@funkthat.com> <CAOENNMA-dwPQr53bM4rzC=1eitoi-JAB4mCGx4zybFwUC=GMNg@mail.gmail.com> <17A804F3-BEA6-46F4-887F-B68750618FD9@netapp.com> <0CF85443-26AC-4931-9D00-3396C18C7690@lurchi.franken.de> <CAOENNMBx8msvwvtN-YqRFb9Y9YGoYcvoSrDi98=qXUcvs64xJg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 11 Aug 2014, at 09:31, Niu Zhixiong <kaiaixi@gmail.com> wrote: > During TCP benchmark. > > root@Freetest0: # netstat -m > 35806/2129/37935 mbufs in use (current/cache/total) > 35251/1037/36288/1011638 mbuf clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) > 35251/1030 mbuf+clusters out of packet secondary zone in use (current/cache) > 0/6/6/505818 4k (page size) jumbo clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) > 0/0/0/149872 9k jumbo clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) > 0/0/0/84303 16k jumbo clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) > 79481K/2630K/82111K bytes allocated to network (current/cache/total) > 15/18307/31 requests for mbufs denied (mbufs/clusters/mbuf+clusters) > 0/0/0 requests for mbufs delayed (mbufs/clusters/mbuf+clusters) > 0/0/0 requests for jumbo clusters delayed (4k/9k/16k) > 0/0/0 requests for jumbo clusters denied (4k/9k/16k) > 0 requests for sfbufs denied > 0 requests for sfbufs delayed > 0 requests for I/O initiated by sendfile > > During SCTP benchmark > 36131/1804/37935 mbufs in use (current/cache/total) > 35394/894/36288/1011638 mbuf clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) > 35394/887 mbuf+clusters out of packet secondary zone in use (current/cache) > 0/6/6/505818 4k (page size) jumbo clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) > 0/0/0/149872 9k jumbo clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) > 0/0/0/84303 16k jumbo clusters in use (current/cache/total/max) > 79950K/2263K/82213K bytes allocated to network (current/cache/total) > 15/18307/31 requests for mbufs denied (mbufs/clusters/mbuf+clusters) > 0/0/0 requests for mbufs delayed (mbufs/clusters/mbuf+clusters) > 0/0/0 requests for jumbo clusters delayed (4k/9k/16k) > 0/0/0 requests for jumbo clusters denied (4k/9k/16k) > 0 requests for sfbufs denied > 0 requests for sfbufs delayed > 0 requests for I/O initiated by sendfile Thanks. I was more asking Lars to have a look if the igb problems he observed are related to mbuf shortages... I observed that a long time ago and I think it was fixed. Not sure about 10.0, since this was on head at that time... Best regards Michael > > > Regards, > Niu Zhixiong > －－－－－－－－－－－－－－－ > kaiaixi@gmail.com > > > On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Michael Tuexen <Michael.Tuexen@lurchi.franken.de> wrote: > On 11 Aug 2014, at 09:08, Eggert, Lars <lars@netapp.com> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > On 2014-8-10, at 5:48, Niu Zhixiong <kaiaixi@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I am using Intel I350-T4 NIC. > > > > igb driver? > > > > I've been having weird issues with this driver under 10-RELEASE, too. On one machine, I had to limit hw.igb.num_queues=2 in order to get any sort of useful connectivity. On another machine, I had to severely bump kern.ipc.nmbclusters & friends. I'm not sure this is the issue here, since SCTP seems to be working OK, but I'm not trusting igb NICs at the moment. > Was there any suspicious output provided by netstat -m when the problems occur? > > Best regards > Michael > > > > Lars > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CB687875-FB0A-448D-A4E2-EA9D3E693DAF>