From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Oct 4 10:28:40 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from imo-r03.mx.aol.com (imo-r03.mx.aol.com [152.163.225.99]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1355E37B403 for ; Thu, 4 Oct 2001 10:28:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Bsdguru@aol.com by imo-r03.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v31_r1.7.) id n.137.296ca27 (4241) for ; Thu, 4 Oct 2001 13:28:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Bsdguru@aol.com Message-ID: <137.296ca27.28edf63e@aol.com> Date: Thu, 4 Oct 2001 13:28:30 EDT Subject: 64bit Ethernet Card (if_sf driver) To: hackers@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 139 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG I've been testing the adaptec 64044 card (if_sf driver) which is a 64bit 66Mhz 4 port ethernet. I can have come to one of two conclusions: 1) the card sucks 2) the driver sucks or both. A 32bit Dlink 4 port card outperforms it by a wide margin, as do 32bit eepro100s. "wide margin" being defined as about 40%. Given that bus resources are not easily measureable..Im quoting cpu usage for handling the same number of pps. But its pretty difficult to justify using a 64bit slot and rather expensive card with such lousy performance. I cant even justify the bus-bandwidth saving with a card that cant route more than 250Mb/s. I guess my question has to do with whether the board is just a dog or the driver needs substantial optimization. The folks at adaptec aren't dopes generally, so I cant imagine that they chose a chipset that was so inferior to the one on their 32bit adapter (which uses the same as the Dlink). Anyone with experience or ideas? Bryan To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message