From owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Dec 1 17:34:05 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: stable@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D463A106566C; Tue, 1 Dec 2009 17:34:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from efinley.lists@gmail.com) Received: from mail-px0-f190.google.com (mail-px0-f190.google.com [209.85.216.190]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B4D58FC13; Tue, 1 Dec 2009 17:34:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pxi28 with SMTP id 28so3788064pxi.7 for ; Tue, 01 Dec 2009 09:34:05 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=HJbpugDj44EYfkZMkN5H2woHWLoJEoSNzfld25SLcMo=; b=r1wSEI3DKoOB+IcKLUkXjcXuX6VqNDPUHBguXqzeqfaxnXzT6yKJz7+JyUThyhiOFe ZrgE2ZevvS7pqdYavG6MJGpfz8DqOz0hkxUULhUH+Rsv9YfMyZxl+9oVPyYoEpvjY629 yMcN8oU98llimOgv0GOhGcQD30EN7Z9PDlwiU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=SHsXfsl9C4QGQ3Z50p7uQf/rb+xoY3PqrO9UQGIPNFbfOZYzaMfYvf1hq/UznI/MXS mIBCKsXZBqG+RWWFLm+bxmnGkyZkWPlQQ6MZbLv6W4p9HYq7MYQyNlGjnQ6qC6p1+ubz EyfP69U6jDvc1p/dpFrirtOFYVJjBkqdODOqk= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.142.59.10 with SMTP id h10mr659567wfa.91.1259687110740; Tue, 01 Dec 2009 09:05:10 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20091201.102925.218343479.hrs@allbsd.org> References: <20091130.170451.24460248.hrs@allbsd.org> <2a41acea0911301119j1449be58y183f2fe1d1112a68@mail.gmail.com> <20091201.102925.218343479.hrs@allbsd.org> Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2009 10:05:10 -0700 Message-ID: <54e63c320912010905u51ccbc92o56ebb71af2630166@mail.gmail.com> From: Elliot Finley To: Hiroki Sato Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: stable@freebsd.org, Robert Watson , jfvogel@gmail.com Subject: Re: em interface slow down on 8.0R X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2009 17:34:05 -0000 On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 6:29 PM, Hiroki Sato wrote: > Jack Vogel wrote > in <2a41acea0911301119j1449be58y183f2fe1d1112a68@mail.gmail.com>: > > jf> I will look into this Hiroki, as time goes the older hardware does not > jf> always > jf> get test cycles like one might wish. > > Here's some more info to throw into the mix. I have several new boxes running 8-Stable (a few hours after release). Leaving all sysctl at default, I get around 400mbps testing with netperf or iperf. If I set the following on the box running 'netserver' or 'iperf -s': kern.ipc.maxsockbuf=16777216 net.inet.tcp.recvspace=1048576 then I can get around 926mbps. But then if I make those same changes on the box running the client side of netperf or iperf the performance drops back down to around 400mbps. All boxes have the same hardware. they have two 4-port Intel NICS in them. em1@pci0:5:0:1: class=0x020000 card=0x10a48086 chip=0x10a48086 rev=0x06 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'Intel Corporation' device = '82571EB Gigabit Ethernet Controller' class = network subclass = ethernet any pointers on further network tuning to get bidirectional link saturation would be much appreciated. These boxes are not in production yet, so anyone that would like to have access to troubleshoot, just ask. TIA Elliot