From owner-freebsd-pf@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Jan 27 19:39:49 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C87F3106564A; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 19:39:49 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ml@my.gd) Received: from mail-ww0-f50.google.com (mail-ww0-f50.google.com [74.125.82.50]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4139D8FC0A; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 19:39:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wwf26 with SMTP id 26so2388332wwf.31 for ; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 11:39:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.227.11.143 with SMTP id t15mr1612016wbt.27.1296157186115; Thu, 27 Jan 2011 11:39:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from dfleuriot.local ([83.167.62.196]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u9sm1966078wbg.0.2011.01.27.11.39.42 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 27 Jan 2011 11:39:43 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4D41C9FC.10503@my.gd> Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 20:39:40 +0100 From: Damien Fleuriot User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sergey Lobanov References: <4D41417A.20904@my.gd> <1DB50624F8348F48840F2E2CF6040A9D014BEB8833@orsmsx508.amr.corp.intel.com> <4D41B197.6070308@my.gd> <201101280146.57028.wmn@siberianet.ru> In-Reply-To: <201101280146.57028.wmn@siberianet.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: "freebsd-stable@freebsd.org" , "freebsd-pf@freebsd.org" Subject: Re: High interrupt rate on a PF box + performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-pf@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Technical discussion and general questions about packet filter \(pf\)" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2011 19:39:49 -0000 On 1/27/11 7:46 PM, Sergey Lobanov wrote: > В сообщении от Пятница 28 января 2011 00:55:35 автор Damien Fleuriot написал: >> On 1/27/11 6:41 PM, Vogel, Jack wrote: >>> Jeremy is right, if you have a problem the first step is to try the >>> latest code. >>> >>> However, when I look at the interrupts below I don't see what the problem >>> is? The Broadcom seems to have about the same rate, it just doesn't have >>> MSIX (multiple vectors). >>> >>> Jack >> >> My main concern is that the CPU %interrupt is quite high, also, we seem >> to be experiencing input errors on the interfaces. > Would you show igb tuning which is done in loader.conf and output of sysctl > dev.igb.0? > Did you rise number of igb descriptors such as: > hw.igb.rxd=4096 > hw.igb.txd=4096 ? There is no tuning at all on our part in the loader's conf. Find below the sysctls: # sysctl -a |grep igb dev.igb.0.%desc: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection version - 1.7.3 dev.igb.0.%driver: igb dev.igb.0.%location: slot=0 function=0 dev.igb.0.%pnpinfo: vendor=0x8086 device=0x10d6 subvendor=0x8086 subdevice=0x145a class=0x020000 dev.igb.0.%parent: pci14 dev.igb.0.debug: -1 dev.igb.0.stats: -1 dev.igb.0.flow_control: 3 dev.igb.0.enable_aim: 1 dev.igb.0.low_latency: 128 dev.igb.0.ave_latency: 450 dev.igb.0.bulk_latency: 1200 dev.igb.0.rx_processing_limit: 100 dev.igb.1.%desc: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection version - 1.7.3 dev.igb.1.%driver: igb dev.igb.1.%location: slot=0 function=1 dev.igb.1.%pnpinfo: vendor=0x8086 device=0x10d6 subvendor=0x8086 subdevice=0x145a class=0x020000 dev.igb.1.%parent: pci14 dev.igb.1.debug: -1 dev.igb.1.stats: -1 dev.igb.1.flow_control: 3 dev.igb.1.enable_aim: 1 dev.igb.1.low_latency: 128 dev.igb.1.ave_latency: 450 dev.igb.1.bulk_latency: 1200 dev.igb.1.rx_processing_limit: 100