Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 9 Oct 2006 05:50:18 GMT
From:      Astrodog <astrodog@gmail.com>
To:        freebsd-bugs@FreeBSD.org
Subject:   Re: kern/104056: VMware ESX 3.0: lnc0: Missed packet -- no receive buffer
Message-ID:  <200610090550.k995oIc1040513@freefall.freebsd.org>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
The following reply was made to PR kern/104056; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: Astrodog <astrodog@gmail.com>
To: "Jonas Nagel" <fireball@zerouptime.ch>
Cc: bug-followup@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: kern/104056: VMware ESX 3.0: lnc0: Missed packet -- no receive buffer
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2006 00:44:07 -0500

 On 10/8/06, Jonas Nagel <fireball@zerouptime.ch> wrote:
 > Never mind my last mail; I was able to install the tools through the
 > ports. I used the vmware-guestd5 port, since I don't run X on that VM.
 >
 > It wouldn't install the vmxnet.ko though by default.
 >
 > There is also only one precompiled for FreeBSD 5.3 on the ISO; I copied
 > it over and it loaded fine.
 >
 > dns1# ll vmxnet.ko
 > -r-xr-xr-x  1 root  wheel  12837 Oct  8 23:59 vmxnet.ko
 > dns1# kldstat
 > Id Refs Address    Size     Name
 >  1    5 0xc0400000 6f0e44   kernel
 >  2    1 0xc0af1000 59f00    acpi.ko
 >  3    1 0xc5f0e000 3000     vmmemctl.ko
 >  4    1 0xc5f11000 4000     vmxnet.ko
 >
 > dns1# ps ax |grep vmware
 > 85086  ??  Ss     0:01.93 /usr/local/sbin/vmware-guestd --background /var/run/vmware_guestd.pid --halt-command
 >
 > I even put the said vmxnet.ko into /boot/kernel and loaded it using
 > 'vmxnet_load="YES"'. But this all didn't have any influence over network
 > performance.
 >
 > Specially the connection to other virtual machines is less than
 > acceptable. Also note the interesting pattern:
 >
 > dns1# ping -s 16000 hirtdco01
 > PING hirtdco01.hirtdom.local (10.0.0.90): 16000 data bytes
 > 16008 bytes from 10.0.0.90: icmp_seq=0 ttl=128 time=2.148 ms
 > 16008 bytes from 10.0.0.90: icmp_seq=1 ttl=128 time=1.854 ms
 > 16008 bytes from 10.0.0.90: icmp_seq=2 ttl=128 time=878.200 ms
 > 16008 bytes from 10.0.0.90: icmp_seq=3 ttl=128 time=1.963 ms
 > 16008 bytes from 10.0.0.90: icmp_seq=4 ttl=128 time=1007.225 ms
 > 16008 bytes from 10.0.0.90: icmp_seq=5 ttl=128 time=2.003 ms
 > 16008 bytes from 10.0.0.90: icmp_seq=6 ttl=128 time=1007.256 ms
 > 16008 bytes from 10.0.0.90: icmp_seq=7 ttl=128 time=167.444 ms
 > 16008 bytes from 10.0.0.90: icmp_seq=8 ttl=128 time=2.328 ms
 > 16008 bytes from 10.0.0.90: icmp_seq=9 ttl=128 time=1.985 ms
 > (...)
 > --- hirtdco01.hirtdom.local ping statistics ---
 > 88 packets transmitted, 81 packets received, 7% packet loss
 > round-trip min/avg/max/stddev = 1.581/298.857/1010.492/417.300 ms
 >
 > It goes from 1-2 ms up to 1 second and down again or, well, results into
 > timeouts.
 >
 > Any other idea (besides blaming it to VMware)?
 >
 
 What kind of system load is there on that? I've seen FreeBSD under
 VMWare get kinda messed up if the other VMs are heavily loaded.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200610090550.k995oIc1040513>