From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Mar 1 15:08:06 2008 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 162D1106566B for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2008 15:08:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from if@xip.at) Received: from chile.gbit.at (ns1.xip.at [193.239.188.99]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 751918FC19 for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2008 15:08:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from if@xip.at) Received: (qmail 3258 invoked from network); 1 Mar 2008 16:08:03 +0100 Received: from unknown (HELO filebunker.xip.at) (86.59.10.180) by chile.gbit.at with (DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA encrypted) SMTP; 1 Mar 2008 16:08:03 +0100 Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 16:08:02 +0100 (CET) From: Ingo Flaschberger To: Willem Jan Withagen In-Reply-To: <47C93E8B.3010609@digiware.nl> Message-ID: References: <20080226003107.54CD94500E@ptavv.es.net> <47C8964C.9080309@digiware.nl> <47C93E8B.3010609@digiware.nl> User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (LFD 882 2007-12-20) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: alves , freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, "=?x-unknown?B?IkRhbmllbA==?= Dias =?x-unknown?B?R29uw6ci?="@FreeBSD.ORG, Kevin Oberman Subject: Re: FBSD 1GBit router? X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 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, 01 Mar 2008 15:08:06 -0000 >> Thats why my next router will be based at this box: >> http://www.axiomtek.com/products/ViewProduct.asp?view=429 > > Nice piece of hardware. > Don't like the 2.5" one disk option though. > > And not shure what to think of: > "Seven 10/100/1000Mbps (through PCI-E by one > interface) ports (RJ-45)" > Which seems to suggest everything comes in thru on PCI-E interface. > That than better have 8 or 16 lanes. Each 1000Mbps port is connected via 1 lane PCI-E, which is fast enough. 1 lane: 250Mbyte/sec -> 2Gpbs >> Hopefully there will be direct memory bus connected nic's in future. >> (HyperTransport connected nic's) > > Well that is going to be an AMD only solution, and I'm not even shure > that AMD would like to have other things than CPU's on that bus. > >> >>> What it does not explain is why you can only get 80Mb/s with 64byte >>> packets, which would suggest other bottlenecks than just the bus. >> >> Perhaps something with interrupts: >> http://books.google.at/books?id=pr4fspaQqZkC&pg=PA144&lpg=PA144&dq=pci+interrupt+delay&source=web&ots=zbvVU2CgVx&sig=APe9YjdtK35ccnow7BDI2hzie7s&hl=de#PPA144,M1 >> >> >> >> MSI (Message-signalled Interrupts) are not very common on PCI architekture; >> PCI-E use only MSI. >> >> The kpps keept always around 100, equally if I used fast-forwarding, >> fast-interrupts, or higher HZ values than 1000HZ. > > MSI is not used for regular PCI busses.Could be that PCI-E does use it. > I believe youon that. But even than I'd like to know where the bottleneck is > in the 100kp/s limit with 64byte pakkets. As I also tested with polling (currently I use interface polling for the router) and also reached only 100kpps, the bottleneck must be someting different. >> But 100kpps is great for a router hardware of about 600eur. > > I've seen routers 10 times that expensive, not able to that. me too. Kind regards, Ingo Flaschberger