From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Mar 21 16:41:23 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@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 9F187990 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 16:41:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.adm.hostpoint.ch (mail.adm.hostpoint.ch [IPv6:2a00:d70:0:a::e0]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 570491E8 for ; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 16:41:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [2001:1620:2013:1:98ae:107d:2646:4979] (port=62719) by mail.adm.hostpoint.ch with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.80.1 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1WR2VV-0001hf-AP; Fri, 21 Mar 2014 17:41:21 +0100 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.2 \(1874\)) Subject: Re: 9.2 ixgbe tx queue hang From: Markus Gebert In-Reply-To: Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 17:40:40 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <7B586D3A-BD6B-40B1-980E-7F9FD4A49F6A@hostpoint.ch> References: <1543350122.637684.1395368002237.JavaMail.root@uoguelph.ca> <34491192-F8EC-45C1-A7C8-61C3EBE5CFBD@hostpoint.ch> To: Christopher Forgeron X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1874) Cc: FreeBSD Net , Rick Macklem , Jack Vogel X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2014 16:41:23 -0000 On 21.03.2014, at 15:49, Christopher Forgeron = wrote: > However, if you can make a spare tester of the same hardware, that's > perfect - And you can generate all the load you need with benchmark > software like iometer, large NFS copies, or perhaps a small replica of = your > network. Synthetic load is easier to control, and thus easier to = reproduce > the issue and speed testing. Heck, you may be able to do it all by = looping > through your two ix adapters and never using an external client. >=20 > It's a bit of a pain to setup, but it's worth the effort imo. The main problem is, that all the affected systems are blades which are = only connected 1gig. I think that=92s the main reason we have trouble = reproducing the problem and I cannot change that, because we simply lack = the parts to produce any kind of 10gig connection between blades. So I = will postpone this idea, especially since our problems seem very similar = again. 9.2 or 10.0 does not seem to matter, at least for now. Markus