From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Apr 20 14:55:22 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0DA7216A4CE for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 14:55:22 +0000 (GMT) Received: from stephanie.unixdaemons.com (stephanie.unixdaemons.com [67.18.111.194]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B170B43D39 for ; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 14:55:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bmilekic@technokratis.com) Received: from stephanie.unixdaemons.com (bmilekic@localhost.unixdaemons.com [127.0.0.1])j3KEtKkm063383; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 10:55:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from bmilekic@localhost) by stephanie.unixdaemons.com (8.13.4/8.12.1/Submit) id j3KEtJu0063382; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 10:55:19 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from bmilekic@technokratis.com) X-Authentication-Warning: stephanie.unixdaemons.com: bmilekic set sender to bmilekic@technokratis.com using -f Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 10:55:19 -0400 From: Bosko Milekic To: "Jin Guojun [VFFS]" Message-ID: <20050420145519.GB59707@technokratis.com> References: <20050419183335.F18008131@joshua.stabbursmoen.no> <42655887.7060203@alumni.rice.edu> <4265724A.1040705@stabbursmoen.no> <42657420.3040104@he.iki.fi> <20050419214644.GB3656@technokratis.com> <20050420123251.A85348@delplex.bde.org> <4265D2D3.9040302@lbl.gov> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4265D2D3.9040302@lbl.gov> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i cc: Eivind Hestnes cc: performance@freebsd.org cc: Petri Helenius cc: Bruce Evans Subject: Re: Performance Intel Pro 1000 MT (PWLA8490MT) X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 14:55:22 -0000 On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 08:56:03PM -0700, Jin Guojun [VFFS] wrote: > Bruce Evans wrote: > > >On Tue, 19 Apr 2005, Bosko Milekic wrote: > > > >> My experience with 6.0-CURRENT has been that I am able to push at > >> least about 400kpps INTO THE KERNEL from a gigE em card on its own > >> 64-bit PCI-X 133MHz bus (i.e., the bus is uncontested) and that's > > > > > >A 64-bit bus doesn't seem to be essential for reasonable performance. > > > >I get about 210 kpps (receive) for a bge card on an old Athlon system > >with a 32-bit PCI 33MHz bus. Overclocking this bus speeds up at least > >sending almost proportionally to the overclocking :-). This is with > >my version of an old version of -current, with no mpsafenet, no driver > >tuning, and no mistuning (no INVARIANTS, etc., no POLLING, no HZ > 100). > >Sending goes slightly slower (about 200 kppps). > > Yes, 64-bit is not essential for getting 400~700 Mbps as long as the system > has enough high memory bandwidth, but it is essential to get full Gigabits. > > Simple numbers are in "Tips" section at the bottom of the following page: > > http://www-didc.lbl.gov/NCS/generic/ncs-00.html > > and the details are described in the papers linked. > > P.S. Question the unit "kpps" used in original email. I am not sure > what this really means. > GigE is possible to produce 400 kpps if packet size is 300 > bytes or less. > If packet size is 1500 byte, the maximum pps is 83k (83kpps). > But, 200-400 kbps is kind low, maybe I missed some previous > emails. Obviously we're talking about small packets. :-) -- Bosko Milekic bmilekic@technokratis.com bmilekic@FreeBSD.org