Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 6 Jun 2012 19:24:10 +0200
From:      Sebastian Stach <sebsta@t-online.de>
To:        freebsd-stable <freebsd-stable@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: em interfaces supermicro X9SCM-F board
Message-ID:  <3B262A53-C137-4E4E-B1B7-7471B1FBA258@t-online.de>
In-Reply-To: <4FCF2E6E.2040902@quip.cz>
References:  <4FCE37FC.1090405@gmail.com>	<878874BA-2F5C-4A7E-8690-2A8A96536AE0@t-online.de>	<4FCE6931.6010901@quip.cz>	<FF941767-FFC3-4D5E-B884-5D487F71E98E@t-online.de> <4FCE786A.2030205@quip.cz> <4FCF2E6E.2040902@quip.cz>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Thanks for doing the test.

My conditions are different in that i have a gigabit network.
The only difference in the iperf options is that i'm using
-d (dualmode).

On the weekend i will have time to do a test with the NICs
set to 100MBit.

Sebastian Stach


Am 06.06.2012 um 12:18 schrieb Miroslav Lachman:

> I am running iperf for more than 11 hours without any problem. More =
than 450GB were transmitted.
> The NIC is connected to old 100Mbps switch and using first port (em0) =
in shared mode for remote management.
>=20
> em0: flags=3D8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu =
1500
> =
options=3D4219b<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,WOL=
_MAGIC,VLAN_HWTSO>
>        ether 00:25:90:73:d1:76
>        inet xx.xx.xx.xx netmask 0xffffff80 broadcast xx.xx.xx.xx
>        media: Ethernet autoselect (100baseTX <full-duplex>)
>        status: active
>=20
>=20
> The iperf command on Supermicro side was:
>=20
> # iperf -c xx.xx.xx.yy --format k -m -p 999 -t 1800
>=20
>=20
> The other side (Cisco UCS C200 M2) was:
>=20
> # iperf -s -p 999
>=20
> Server listening on TCP port 999
> TCP window size: 64.0 KByte (default)
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> [  5] local 94.124.105.117 port 999 connected with 94.124.105.115 port =
29787
> [  5]  0.0-1799.8 sec  19.5 GBytes  93.0 Mbits/sec
> [  4] local 94.124.105.117 port 999 connected with 94.124.105.115 port =
44792
> [  4]  0.0-1799.9 sec  19.5 GBytes  93.1 Mbits/sec
> [  5] local 94.124.105.117 port 999 connected with 94.124.105.115 port =
11327
> [  5]  0.0-1799.9 sec  19.5 GBytes  93.0 Mbits/sec
>=20
> Both sides are running FreeBSD 8.3-RELEASE amd64
>=20
>=20
> Let me know if I should run iperf with different options to better =
simulate your conditions where your NIC hangs.
>=20
> Miroslav Lachman




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B262A53-C137-4E4E-B1B7-7471B1FBA258>