From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Sun May 9 17:12:27 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8B98106564A; Sun, 9 May 2010 17:12:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jfvogel@gmail.com) Received: from mail-ww0-f54.google.com (mail-ww0-f54.google.com [74.125.82.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 493AC8FC13; Sun, 9 May 2010 17:12:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wwd20 with SMTP id 20so641885wwd.13 for ; Sun, 09 May 2010 10:12:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=OK4RJYhBGfSrCwbocgcSFmwMkxfVYKRrfyPrwjNPYW8=; b=P5O2lGO0gxXKyc3KfwpQudgPDXcinGtZKPWLVdWh9a/Hz3TtUv9vcgsyJZ1Y+5+7P4 XAO0RWlPmD0XiEoqkZMyMRcdIMqUzMkWnCjjhWm7Cp0URbG/wI6iTIoe2wGFgJ0uH13U aINQ4AKoonYSlc7Jgvnk2Xm8DCOWEyrtBsttY= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=BbvfOvAycPJ1XspT8mFKlpN7qeR6hoQ1cMe5YJFQSS8hozmoNT2Dg9YGxbZ2LbTvGY JAd6s1bbSzxJvc0lXpixZ6sfgy95Pa8ne/zWMR2+aKxA8j0N4Wz0EfnGR96xn5M6TlQz 9rS20HY17n/Pa8AlUGZxgCOR2Dxh9B2NyK9KA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.216.87.68 with SMTP id x46mr1709896wee.145.1273425145932; Sun, 09 May 2010 10:12:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.216.29.129 with HTTP; Sun, 9 May 2010 10:12:25 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <473112.87657.qm@web63906.mail.re1.yahoo.com> References: <1273323582.3304.31.camel@efe> <473112.87657.qm@web63906.mail.re1.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 9 May 2010 10:12:25 -0700 Message-ID: From: Jack Vogel To: Barney Cordoba Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: Murat Balaban , freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, grarpamp , Vincent Hoffman Subject: Re: Intel 10Gb X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 09 May 2010 17:12:28 -0000 On Sun, May 9, 2010 at 6:43 AM, Barney Cordoba wrote: > > > --- On Sat, 5/8/10, Murat Balaban wrote: > > > From: Murat Balaban > > Subject: Re: Intel 10Gb > > To: "Vincent Hoffman" > > Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org, "grarpamp" > > > Date: Saturday, May 8, 2010, 8:59 AM > > > > Much of the FreeBSD networking stack has been made parallel > > in order to > > cope with high packet rates at 10 Gig/sec operation. > > > > I've seen good numbers (near 10 Gig) in my tests involving > > TCP/UDP > > send/receive. (latest Intel driver). > > > > As far as BPF is concerned, above statement does not hold > > true, > > since there is some work that needs to be done here in > > terms > > of BPF locking and parallelism. My tests show that there > > is a high lock contention around "bpf interface lock", > > resulting > > in input errors at high packet rates and with many bpf > > devices. > > > > I belive GSoC 2010 project, Multiqueue BPF, is a milestone > > for this: > > http://www.freebsd.org/projects/ideas/ideas.html#p-multiqbpf > > > > I'm also working on this problem myself and will post a > > diff whenever > > I have something usable. > > > > > > -- > > Murat > > http://www.enderunix.org/murat/ > > > > > > > > On Sat, 2010-05-08 at 10:01 +0100, Vincent Hoffman > > > > wrote: > > > Looks a little like > > > http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-all/2010-May/023679.html > > > but for intel. cool. > > > > > > Vince > > > On 07/05/2010 23:01, grarpamp wrote: > > > > Just wondering in general these days how close > > FreeBSD is to > > > > full 10Gb rates at various packet sizes from > > minimum ethernet > > > > frame to max jumbo 65k++. For things like BPF, > > ipfw/pf, routing, > > > > switching, etc. > > > > http://www.ntop.org/blog/?p=86 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Blah, Blah, Blah. Let's see some real numbers on real networks under > real loads. Until then, you've got nothing. > > BC > > > Blah blah blah, you're one to talk, do you EVER do anything but criticize others? Nothing is right. Jack