From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 14 03:21:47 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 272F616A4CE for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 03:21:47 +0000 (GMT) Received: from rproxy.gmail.com (rproxy.gmail.com [64.233.170.193]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BEED143D66 for ; Tue, 14 Dec 2004 03:21:46 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from k.ishish@gmail.com) Received: by rproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id a41so1076251rng for ; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:21:46 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=XDQnp4NvrB1jbdJoXh5cpWkxqosEwbvNqUWVYvpAWkTT84nEAvRs3vOZ9ylHI++nnmQL8vMVaWSpBWE6n/vomMvrxqxkjONSkBfl/d3JUEeBdfGPH0HQldrUB9kIXKlK+hdpJ3ZcfFw2CffYeRmHtf1L/ZclNTERK8EhsPMTPcQ= Received: by 10.38.68.47 with SMTP id q47mr2360395rna; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:21:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.38.73.33 with HTTP; Mon, 13 Dec 2004 19:21:46 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 12:21:46 +0900 From: Katsuji Ishikawa To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: polling probrem? X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Katsuji Ishikawa List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 14 Dec 2004 03:21:47 -0000 I have rebuid the FreeBSD 5.3-RELEASE kernel with options below: options DEVICE_POLLING options HZ=1000 on ThinkPad iSeries 1800. And setting 'sysctl kern.polling.enable=1', then running dnetc installed from ports(dnetc-2.9008.491_1,1), I detected considerable amount of packet loss. Top command shows that dnetc is using 1000% (not 100%, but 1000%!). ping result (snip) 64 bytes from 192.168.2.200: icmp_seq=258 ttl=64 time=9597.83 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.2.200: icmp_seq=268 ttl=64 time=9624.56 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.2.200: icmp_seq=278 ttl=64 time=9612.66 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.2.200: icmp_seq=288 ttl=64 time=9639.19 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.2.200: icmp_seq=298 ttl=64 time=19652 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.2.200: icmp_seq=318 ttl=64 time=9579.19 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.2.200: icmp_seq=328 ttl=64 time=9606.89 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.2.200: icmp_seq=329 ttl=64 time=8606.83 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.2.200: icmp_seq=338 ttl=64 time=19564.4 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.2.200: icmp_seq=340 ttl=64 time=17564.2 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.2.200: icmp_seq=358 ttl=64 time=9547.07 ms 64 bytes from 192.168.2.200: icmp_seq=361 ttl=64 time=6546.53 ms ^C --- 192.168.2.200 ping statistics --- 372 packets transmitted, 201 packets received, 45% packet loss round-trip min/avg/max = 0.367/1158.48/19652 ms top result PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE TIME WCPU CPU COMMAND 434 dnetc 139 20 964K 764K RUN 11:09 1259.46% 1259.42% dnetc Is this the problem with polling? Please let me know. Thank you.