From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Sat Sep 22 23:11:14 2018 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5ECD110A67E4 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2018 23:11:14 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Received: from mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (mailman.ysv.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::50:5]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F20648648D for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2018 23:11:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Received: by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) id B606210A67E3; Sat, 22 Sep 2018 23:11:13 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A4CE610A67E2 for ; Sat, 22 Sep 2018 23:11:13 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Received: from hz.grosbein.net (hz.grosbein.net [IPv6:2a01:4f8:d12:604::2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "hz.grosbein.net", Issuer "hz.grosbein.net" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2DD5586487; Sat, 22 Sep 2018 23:11:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Received: from eg.sd.rdtc.ru (eg.sd.rdtc.ru [IPv6:2a03:3100:c:13:0:0:0:5]) by hz.grosbein.net (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id w8MNAxQE084438 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 23 Sep 2018 01:11:00 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) X-Envelope-From: eugen@grosbein.net X-Envelope-To: lev@FreeBSD.org Received: from [10.58.0.4] ([10.58.0.4]) by eg.sd.rdtc.ru (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id w8MNAjPN063046 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NOT); Sun, 23 Sep 2018 06:10:45 +0700 (+07) (envelope-from eugen@grosbein.net) Subject: Re: Looks like igb on 12-ALPHA6 (driver 7.6.1-k) and on 11-STABLE (driver 2.5.3-k) behave very differently on receive [regression?] To: Lev Serebryakov , net@FreeBSD.org References: <1377072414.20180922235207@serebryakov.spb.ru> <1083507782.20180923014837@serebryakov.spb.ru> From: Eugene Grosbein Message-ID: <79b6fb3b-e584-c3d4-d1a4-4a044a5467df@grosbein.net> Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2018 06:10:40 +0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1083507782.20180923014837@serebryakov.spb.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,LOCAL_FROM,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 X-Spam-Report: * -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record * -2.3 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% * [score: 0.0000] * 2.6 LOCAL_FROM From my domains X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on hz.grosbein.net X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 22 Sep 2018 23:11:14 -0000 23.09.2018 5:48, Lev Serebryakov wrote: >> Any hints? > I don't know why, but "server" host could not send more than 710Mbit/s with > Ethernet flow control turned on. Turning flow control off helps. Intel does not recommend MTU over 8.5KB for some NICs supported by igb(4) due to hardware problems: https://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/specification-updates/i218-i219-ethernet-connection-spec-update.pdf