From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 9 09:54:22 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F2A4106567F for ; Sun, 9 May 2010 09:54:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from joe@hostedcontent.com) Received: from mail01.fasti.net (mail01.fasti.net [216.105.91.156]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2A708FC16 for ; Sun, 9 May 2010 09:54:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail01.fasti.net (localhost [127.0.0.2]) by mail01.fasti.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0AC094B103C; Sun, 9 May 2010 05:54:20 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at fasti.net Received: from mail01.fasti.net ([127.0.0.2]) by mail01.fasti.net (mail01.fasti.net [127.0.0.2]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6o0bZVORbxQM; Sun, 9 May 2010 05:54:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [192.168.1.137] (69-165-175-27.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.165.175.27]) by mail01.fasti.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 251DE94B103A; Sun, 9 May 2010 05:54:19 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4BE6864B.5060906@hostedcontent.com> Date: Sun, 09 May 2010 05:54:19 -0400 From: joe User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686 (x86_64); en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jack Vogel References: <4BE565E5.9030505@hostedcontent.com> <4BE529FF.5000008@hostedcontent.com> <4BE59434.9070308@hostedcontent.com> <4BE599B0.60203@hostedcontent.com> <4BE59DBD.4000105@hostedcontent.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Ian FREISLICH , Fabien Thomas , freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: igb broken? Unexplained weirdness with intel 82576 nics on a supermicro board. X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 May 2010 09:54:22 -0000 On 05/08/2010 02:21 PM, Jack Vogel wrote: > The cable, its a simple thing but make SURE you try that, a slightly > damaged one can do weird things and its quick to check, don't overlook > it. > > Jack > > > On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 10:22 AM, joe > wrote: > > On 05/08/2010 01:53 PM, Jack Vogel wrote: > > I still am not clear on this system, how many ports are on it, > and its > an 82576? > Sounds to me like you've proven its not on the box if you can do > fine > when its > on its own. So change ports in the switch, as I said, change > cables, must be > something in that environment. > > Jack > > > On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 10:04 AM, joe > >> > wrote: > > On 05/08/2010 01:31 PM, Jack Vogel wrote: > > Looks like something to do with system C, you might > isolate it, > and try > a back > to back connection with its NICs, change cables, look at > BIOS > settings, > change > the slot the nic is in... All just off the top of my head. > > Jack > > > On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 9:41 AM, joe > > > > > >>> > > wrote: > > On 05/08/2010 11:17 AM, Ian FREISLICH wrote: > > joe wrote: > > On 05/08/2010 06:55 AM, Ian FREISLICH wrote: > > joe wrote: > > I have just tried your > suggeston and > it has > no effect for me ;( > > > Do you have another brand of NIC that > you can > try? At > least that > will isolate whether it's igb(4) or > something else. > > > I will grab a new nic today and try...my > options are > limited > though. > Here are the nics i can get my hands on > > TP-LINK TL-TG3468, 10/100/1000Mbps PCIe Adapter > (supported > by fbsd?) > > > Based on the RTL8168B chip. Should be supported > by the > re(4) > driver. > > Intel (EXPI9301CT) Gigabit CT Desktop > Adapter (yet > another > intel nic) > > > i82574L chip. Should be supported by the em(4) > driver. > I have had > good performance in the past with this driver > and less than > satisfactory performance with the igb(4) driver. > > That may not be your problem though. Before you > go out > and buy, > have a look at the amount of interrupt time your > slow > machine spends > in 'top' or 'systat -vm'. systat will also show the > interrupt rate > for each driver, perhaps it's not doing > interrupt moderation > properly. > This will manifest as more than about a 1000 per > second. > There are > loader tunables for the driver to increase the > number of > transfer > descriptors and to tune interrupt moderation. > > You could try running trafshow (port) on the > interface while > performing the transfer. Perhaps promiscuous > mode will > turn off > some hardware feature that will improve things. > It may > however > break hardware vlanning as it does on my 82575GB > 4 port > igb card. > > Ian > > -- > Ian Freislich > > > I bought those two cards anyways, im in a rush to > figure out > this > problem. That being said i am still encountering the > exact same > problem regardless on which network card i am > running. I am at a > complete loss. I am about to try a raid card to see > if the > problem > might lay within the onboard sata ports. I did pull the > server and > brought it home so that i can test more things quicker. > > I am going to try using a raid card instead of the > onboard sata > ports and see if i still encounter the same problem. > I would > love > any suggestions you may have on where to go from here to > figure out > where the problem might be. > > joe > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-current@freebsd.org > > > > >> > > mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current > To unsubscribe, send any mail to > "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org > > > > > >>" > > > > I think it might have something to so with the nics / > switch, and > their features. I brought the box home, plugged into my gb > switch, > and i am able to FTP data to the server at around 35MB/sec. > > I dont know what would cause this other than some sort of > issue with > the the 3 different types of nics and the switch i am using. > > Any suggestions? > > > > There are two embedded intel 82576 nics on this motherboard. I do > believe i have proven it is not the box itself as it is capable of > high incoming throughput. I have other servers on the switch which > do 55MB/sec without issues. I believe it is a combination of this > server and/or the nics i have and the switch i am using. It's the > only logical explanation if i get the desired throughput on my home > switch but not on the switch that is collocated. I will try updating > the firmware of the switch tonight as well as bringing the switch i > use at home with me. > > Here is a follow-up just incase anyone ever encounters this problem again. I updated the firmware on the switch, made sure jumbo packets were enabled, and the switch was restarted. I'm now seeing the throughput i had expected on this box! 897755008 bytes received in 00:11 (72.74 MB/s) Once again, thank you all for the help! Joe