Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 11 Feb 2015 13:29:58 -0800
From:      Sean Bruno <sbruno@ignoranthack.me>
To:        Sepherosa Ziehau <sepherosa@gmail.com>
Cc:        "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: Intel 82574L (em)
Message-ID:  <54DBC9D6.7020602@ignoranthack.me>
In-Reply-To: <CAMOc5cwG%2BmbcArAt5xSjKYrbZeA40ETZUPgi4y51r_GYYsitQw@mail.gmail.com>
References:  <54CBF396.3090903@ignoranthack.me> <CAMOc5cwG%2BmbcArAt5xSjKYrbZeA40ETZUPgi4y51r_GYYsitQw@mail.gmail.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 02/10/15 18:49, Sepherosa Ziehau wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 31, 2015 at 5:11 AM, Sean Bruno
> <sbruno@ignoranthack.me> wrote:
>> 
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512
>> 
>> http://www.intel.com/content/dam/doc/datasheet/82574l-gbe-controller-datasheet.pdf
>>
>>
>> 
According to 7.1.11, this device does indeed have 2 queues for stuff and
>> or things.  So, basic RSS would be possible in something like an
>> Atom box.
>> 
>> I note that the em(4) driver intentionally disables this on 
>> initialization.  I'm up for some science on my new shiny, soon to
>> be router box. Any reason not to default to 1 queue and allow
>> loader.conf to raise it to 2?
> 
> You could actually enable 2 RX rings w/o MSI-X on 82574; you still
> get the benefit of hardware calculated RSS hash at least.  And as
> far as I have tested, 2 RX rings work for 82574L, but 2 TX rings
> don't work (gave me TX watchdog timeout).  And you could also use 2
> RX rings on 82571/82572/82573 and i217/i218; 2 TX rings work on
> 82571 at least (you need to setup TX context for each TX descriptor
> though).
> 
> Best Regards, sephe
> 
> 


I'm interested in doing this a bit as I now have 5 em(4) interfaces on
my soon to be router box.

I tried modifying the driver to allow num_queues to be raised and I
compiled with EM_MULTIQUEUE set, and all I got for my trouble was
kernel panics.

I'm not sure if the code even works.

sean
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=
=rlKy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?54DBC9D6.7020602>