From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 7 09:36:59 2009 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 355D61065694 for ; Wed, 7 Oct 2009 09:36:59 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org) Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [65.122.17.42]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 073A58FC12 for ; Wed, 7 Oct 2009 09:36:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [65.122.17.41]) by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A049746B0C; Wed, 7 Oct 2009 05:36:58 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 10:36:58 +0100 (BST) From: Robert Watson X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org To: rihad In-Reply-To: <4ACC5DEC.1010006@mail.ru> Message-ID: References: <4AC9E29B.6080908@mail.ru> <20091005123230.GA64167@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <4AC9EFDF.4080302@mail.ru> <4ACA2CC6.70201@elischer.org> <4ACAFF2A.1000206@mail.ru> <4ACB0C22.4000008@mail.ru> <20091006100726.GA26426@svzserv.kemerovo.su> <4ACB42D2.2070909@mail.ru> <20091006142152.GA42350@svzserv.kemerovo.su> <4ACB6223.1000709@mail.ru> <20091006161240.GA49940@svzserv.kemerovo.su> <4ACC5563.602@mail.ru> <4ACC56A6.1030808@mail.ru> <4ACC5DEC.1010006@mail.ru> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, Eugene Grosbein , Luigi Rizzo , Julian Elischer Subject: Re: dummynet dropping too many packets 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: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 09:36:59 -0000 On Wed, 7 Oct 2009, rihad wrote: >> snapshot of the top -SH output in the steady state? Let top run for a few >> minutes and then copy/paste the first 10-20 lines into an e-mail. >> > Sure. Mind you: now there's only 1800 entries in each of the two ipfw > tables, so any drops have stopped. But it only takes another 200-300 entries > to start dropping. Could you do the same in the net.isr.direct=1 configuration so we can compare? Robert > > 155 processes: 10 running, 129 sleeping, 16 waiting > CPU: 2.4% user, 0.0% nice, 2.0% system, 9.3% interrupt, 86.2% idle > Mem: 1691M Active, 1491M Inact, 454M Wired, 130M Cache, 214M Buf, 170M Free > Swap: 2048M Total, 12K Used, 2048M Free > > PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND > 15 root 171 ki31 0K 16K CPU3 3 22.4H 97.85% idle: cpu3 > 14 root 171 ki31 0K 16K CPU4 4 23.0H 96.29% idle: cpu4 > 12 root 171 ki31 0K 16K CPU6 6 23.8H 94.58% idle: cpu6 > 16 root 171 ki31 0K 16K CPU2 2 22.5H 90.72% idle: cpu2 > 13 root 171 ki31 0K 16K CPU5 5 23.4H 90.58% idle: cpu5 > 18 root 171 ki31 0K 16K RUN 0 20.3H 85.60% idle: cpu0 > 17 root 171 ki31 0K 16K CPU1 1 910:03 78.37% idle: cpu1 > 11 root 171 ki31 0K 16K CPU7 7 23.8H 65.62% idle: cpu7 > 21 root -44 - 0K 16K CPU7 7 19:03 48.34% swi1: net > 29 root -68 - 0K 16K WAIT 1 515:49 19.63% irq256: bce0 > 31 root -68 - 0K 16K WAIT 2 56:05 5.52% irq257: bce1 > 19 root -32 - 0K 16K WAIT 5 50:05 3.86% swi4: clock > sio > 983 flowtools 44 0 12112K 6440K select 0 13:20 0.15% flow-capture > 465 root -68 - 0K 16K - 3 51:19 0.00% dummynet > 3 root -8 - 0K 16K - 1 7:41 0.00% g_up > 4 root -8 - 0K 16K - 2 7:14 0.00% g_down > 30 root -64 - 0K 16K WAIT 6 5:30 0.00% irq16: mfi0 > >