From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Feb 3 22:53:29 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C35FD16A420 for ; Fri, 3 Feb 2006 22:53:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gallatin@cs.duke.edu) Received: from duke.cs.duke.edu (duke.cs.duke.edu [152.3.140.1]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5165043D45 for ; Fri, 3 Feb 2006 22:53:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gallatin@cs.duke.edu) Received: from grasshopper.cs.duke.edu (grasshopper.cs.duke.edu [152.3.145.30]) by duke.cs.duke.edu (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id k13MrOFK026741 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 3 Feb 2006 17:53:24 -0500 (EST) Received: (from gallatin@localhost) by grasshopper.cs.duke.edu (8.12.9p2/8.12.9/Submit) id k13MrJ9R077926; Fri, 3 Feb 2006 17:53:19 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from gallatin) From: Andrew Gallatin MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <17379.57055.535149.295156@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2006 17:53:19 -0500 (EST) To: Kris Kennaway In-Reply-To: <20060203225114.GA9845@xor.obsecurity.org> References: <17379.56708.421007.613310@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu> <20060203225114.GA9845@xor.obsecurity.org> X-Mailer: VM 6.75 under 21.1 (patch 12) "Channel Islands" XEmacs Lucid Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: machdep.cpu_idle_hlt and SMP perf? 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: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 22:53:29 -0000 Kris Kennaway writes: > On Fri, Feb 03, 2006 at 05:47:32PM -0500, Andrew Gallatin wrote: > > > > Why dooes machdep.cpu_idle_hlt=1 drop my 10GbE network rx > > performance by a considerable amount (7.5Gbs -> 5.5Gbs)? > > I don't know, but I've set this to 0 on my machines because I also > noticed a significant performance drop on general workloads with it > set to 1. I think I'll follow your lead. Good thing there is a cold snap coming ;) Drew