From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Aug 30 20:17:18 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8319C106566B; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 20:17:18 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from lev@FreeBSD.org) Received: from onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru [IPv6:2a01:4f8:131:60a2::2]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 163568FC0A; Thu, 30 Aug 2012 20:17:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lion.home.serebryakov.spb.ru (unknown [IPv6:2001:470:923f:1:49ee:4a:4b3c:6f58]) (Authenticated sender: lev@serebryakov.spb.ru) by onlyone.friendlyhosting.spb.ru (Postfix) with ESMTPA id D788D4AC2D; Fri, 31 Aug 2012 00:17:15 +0400 (MSK) Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 00:17:11 +0400 From: Lev Serebryakov Organization: FreeBSD X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Message-ID: <1435570640.20120831001711@serebryakov.spb.ru> To: Adrian Chadd In-Reply-To: References: <1865271844.20120829131610@serebryakov.spb.ru> <1807373989.20120829223125@serebryakov.spb.ru> <20120830152726.A33776@sola.nimnet.asn.au> <534292400.20120830131158@serebryakov.spb.ru> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1251 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Ian Smith Subject: Re: Bad routing performance on 500Mhz Geode LX with CURRENT, ipfw and mpd5 (was: ipfw, "ip|all" proto and PPPoE -- does PPPoE packets passed to ipfw?) X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list Reply-To: lev@FreeBSD.org List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 20:17:18 -0000 Hello, Adrian. You wrote 30 =E0=E2=E3=F3=F1=F2=E0 2012 =E3., 23:01:12: >> Yes, it is only 500Mhz Geode LX, but it is only 40 mbit/s and >> 4.5Kpps in both directions, nothing like full 100Mbit or more, and >> I've learned "empirical" rule/heuristics about 1Gbit(!) per 1Ghz(!) >> for softrouters, So, theoretically, 40mbit should not be a problem at >> all for this hardware. AC> It honestly shouldn't be that bad, but without dumping a bunch of AC> effort into profiling (even if it's just sampled profiling via gprof) Is it possible to use gprof with kernel? As here is no userland processes involved: PPPoE is porcessed by netgrpah, routing & ipfw is kernel stuff too... AC> I won't know whether that's "good" or not. >> And now I have not-working WiFi (this box is also AP) when wired >> traffic is high (wifi speed drops down to 100KB/s from 2.5-3MB/s >> without wired traffic), userland freezes under load (very bad with >> ULE, better with 4BSD), and inability to pass through 40Mbit in both >> directions simultaneously. AC> Hm. What about disabling preemption and see if that helps? I still AC> haven't fully debugged/diagnosed why preemption acts weirdly on my AC> mips24k boards (which is why all the mips24k Atheros SoC's have 4BSD + AC> no PREEMPT.) I'll try it. Also, I noticed, that with any scheduler it could not route 40Mbit in BOTH directions simultaneously, and downstream has priority. When there is no much of downstream, it upload at 40-45Mibt/s, and when downstream is 40-45Mibt/s upstream could be only about 20Mbit/s. --=20 // Black Lion AKA Lev Serebryakov