Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 16:36:09 -0300 From: Eduardo Meyer <dudu.meyer@gmail.com> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Netmap on em(4) newcomer (first steps) Message-ID: <CAEqdE_45ed%2BMLNP2FOzH-BLZeSE_YzP82oBvFf-Lj0UdXrRLnA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAEqdE_5QUgbrS%2B3EMLsYDOQfZU_d00FC8uChFm6VL1MZ3qF_iQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAEqdE_5QUgbrS%2B3EMLsYDOQfZU_d00FC8uChFm6VL1MZ3qF_iQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 8:13 PM, Eduardo Meyer <dudu.meyer@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello, > > I would like tro try netmap on em(4) device. Other than comping my kernel > with netmap what else I need to setup a "production-like" environment to > test it? > > The scenario is a simple BGP router w/ FreeBSD forwarding packets from em0 > to em1 with no NAT, etc. > > I read something about using a special virtual switch (VALE), is it > needed? Or is it for testing scenarios only? > > I want to try it on 9-STABLE. > OK I have compiled -STABLE with device netmap statically and rebuilt everyting. I have set: dev.netmap.fwd: 1 dev.netmap.verbose: 1 Test topology is simple: HOST1 ---------- GATEWAY --------- HOST2 HOST1 192.168.250.2 HOST2 192.168.251.2 GATEWAY being 192.168.250.1 (em1) and 192.168.251.1 (em2) Tested with iperf and got the sabe rate of bps (800M) and pps (151k) with or without netmap. How should I use pkt-gen in this scenario? HOST1 nor HOST2 are netmap-aware, only the GATEWAY since I want better forwarding performance on the GW itself. CPU usage is quite the same with and without netmap. What am I doing wrong in this scenario? Thanks again. -- =========== Eduardo Meyer pessoal: dudu.meyer@gmail.com profissional: ddm.farmaciap@saude.gov.br
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAEqdE_45ed%2BMLNP2FOzH-BLZeSE_YzP82oBvFf-Lj0UdXrRLnA>