Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2014 14:18:40 -0200 From: Evandro Nunes <evandronunes12@gmail.com> To: "Andrey V. Elsukov" <bu7cher@yandex.ru> Cc: "Alexander V. Chernikov" <melifaro@freebsd.org>, "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <net@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: netmap in GENERIC, by default, on HEAD Message-ID: <CAG4HiT46ZT1dDTt7Asv8gagPKrwH%2BTS-uUsvKDhNKiXMDM68nA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <545A47A5.4010601@yandex.ru> References: <92D22BEA-DDE5-4C6E-855C-B8CACB0319AC@neville-neil.com> <545A47A5.4010601@yandex.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Andrey V. Elsukov <bu7cher@yandex.ru> wrote: > On 05.11.2014 18:39, George Neville-Neil wrote: > > Howdy, > > > > Last night (Pacific Time) I committed a change so that GENERIC, on HEAD > > has the netmap > > device enabled. This is to increase the breadth of our testing of that > > feature prior > > to the release of FreeBSD 11. > > > > In two weeks I will enable IPSec by default, again in preparation for 11. > > Hi, > > recently we did some IP forwarding tests and the GENERIC kernel is > several times faster than GENERIC+IPSEC. Even when IPSEC has no SA. > > I didn't do test on vanilla kernel, but our kernel is able forward > IPv4/IPv6 on rate close to 8.6 Mpps. The same kernel compiled with IPSEC > can forward only 180 kpps. I think this problem should be solved before > enabling it in GENERIC. > this forward rate you mention is related to netmap? or usual forwarding/fastforwarding? this is a huge number, do you mind sharing your dmesg output and top -PSH output so I can check for interrupt CPU usage and other relevant stuff? thank you
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAG4HiT46ZT1dDTt7Asv8gagPKrwH%2BTS-uUsvKDhNKiXMDM68nA>