Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2007 10:28:01 +0900 From: Pyun YongHyeon <pyunyh@gmail.com> To: Chris <chrcoluk@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD Stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>, freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: nfe driver 6.2 stable Message-ID: <20070929012801.GA11457@cdnetworks.co.kr> In-Reply-To: <3aaaa3a0709281105g1503fdbcu70910de6eae060a0@mail.gmail.com> References: <3aaaa3a0709231657r3264c873ife71800731608b03@mail.gmail.com> <20070924020116.GA36909@eos.sc1.parodius.com> <3aaaa3a0709240844j2603a050nd09bb5482a0f3c21@mail.gmail.com> <20070927065155.GE3692@cdnetworks.co.kr> <3aaaa3a0709271030k24892099ra3409ce6f5f7020f@mail.gmail.com> <20070928000656.GA7119@cdnetworks.co.kr> <3aaaa3a0709281105g1503fdbcu70910de6eae060a0@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 07:05:35PM +0100, Chris wrote: > On 28/09/2007, Pyun YongHyeon <pyunyh@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Thu, Sep 27, 2007 at 06:30:20PM +0100, Chris wrote: > > > On 27/09/2007, Pyun YongHyeon <pyunyh@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Mon, Sep 24, 2007 at 04:44:09PM +0100, Chris wrote: > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > > The card is more stable when using nve driver no crashes still but the > > > > > performance is around the same maxing out at around 200mbit. I was > > > > > expecting nearer 400-500mbit. > > > > > > > > > > e1000phy0: <Marvell 88E1116 Gigabit PHY> on miibus0 > > > > > > > > > > > > > There had been issues nfe(4) with 88E1116/88E1149 PHYs but your issue > > > > seems to be different one. How about manually set media configuration? > > > > For example, "ifconfig nfe0 media 1000baseTX mediaopt full-duplex" > > > > > > > > [...] > > > > > > > > I typod I meant to say nve was unstable and nfe has been rock solid so > > > great work with the driver. I enabled mpsafe now and still no > > > problems and its gave me a little more performance as well, a shame my > > > nic has no hardware features (unusual for a gigabit nic) but overall > > > glad its at least stable. > > > > > > > How did you check network performance? > > Maxing out at around 200Mbps seems weird. Personally, I had never seen > > GigE hardwares that saturate at 200Mbps. One of causes I can think of > > is speed/duplex mismatches with link partner. Manually setting > > speed/duplex might fix your performance issue, I guess. > > > > -- > > Regards, > > Pyun YongHyeon > > > > These are ftp transfers it is running on a amd62 x2 dual core > processor and gig of ram, when at max speed cpu usage is very high in > excess of 80% but not completely maxed out. It now seems to be able > to sustain around 30meg/sec the highest I have seen I havent done any > other testing so if you have a better way it would be good to know ftp transfers involve disk activities so you're not measuring NIC performance. Try one of benchmark programs in ports/benchmarks (e.g. netperf, iperf, ttcp etc). ATM nfe(4)'s interrupt moderation mechanism doesn't seem to work at all so nfe(4) generates too many interrupts. However I don't think it wouldn't be major bottleneck of the performance. > thanks. Please bare in mind I have no local access to the server so > crashing it eg. is expensive for as will have to pay for a kvm switch > netstat -i indicates no collisions for a duplex mismatch so not keen > on trying a manual negotiotian again for reasons above. So even for a > card with no hardware features you would expect it to exceed 200mbit > easily? > Yes. You have a gigabit ethernet controller and fast CPU. Run one of benchmark programs and get a number. > I havent enabled net isr setting I wonder if that will help. > That wouldn't help a lot, I guess. > Chris -- Regards, Pyun YongHyeon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070929012801.GA11457>