From owner-freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Fri Apr 5 19:12:27 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C1A41558690 for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2019 19:12:27 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mach@swishmail.com) Received: from vorlon.swishmail.com (vorlon.swishmail.com [208.72.56.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB6F56FBDA for ; Fri, 5 Apr 2019 19:12:26 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mach@swishmail.com) Received: (qmail 89776 invoked by uid 89); 5 Apr 2019 19:12:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?IPv6:2001:b030:14e:100:83e:cc03:35:83f6?) (mach@swishmail.com@2001:b030:14e:100:83e:cc03:35:83f6) by 2602:ffb8::208:72:56:19 with ESMTPSA (ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 encrypted, authenticated); 5 Apr 2019 19:12:25 -0000 Subject: Re: em performs worse than igb (latency wise) in 12? To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org References: <7673edad-1e50-7e9b-961e-f28ab7a0f41e@ingresso.co.uk> From: Kris von Mach Message-ID: Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2019 03:12:24 +0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.6.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <7673edad-1e50-7e9b-961e-f28ab7a0f41e@ingresso.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Language: en-US X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: AB6F56FBDA X-Spamd-Bar: / Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of mach@swishmail.com designates 208.72.56.19 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=mach@swishmail.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-0.32 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:208.72.56.0/22]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; NEURAL_SPAM_MEDIUM(0.00)[0.003,0]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.75)[-0.749,0]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[swishmail.com]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[cached: mxfilter1.nyc.swishmail.com]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.15)[-0.147,0]; IP_SCORE(-0.01)[country: US(-0.06)]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW(-0.10)[19.56.72.208.list.dnswl.org : 127.0.5.1]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; SUBJECT_ENDS_QUESTION(1.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:14469, ipnet:208.72.56.0/22, country:US]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[] X-BeenThere: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Production branch of FreeBSD source code List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Apr 2019 19:12:27 -0000 On 4/6/2019 2:56 AM, Pete French wrote: > Something odd going on there there - I am using 12-STABLE and I have=20 > igb just fine, and it attaches to the same hardware that 11 did: It does work in 12, throughput is great, just that the latency is higher = than 11. igb0: flags=3D8843 metric 0 mtu 1= 500 options=3De527bb =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 ether 38:ea:a7:8d:c1:6c =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 inet 208.72.56.19 netmask 0xf= ffffc00 broadcast 208.72.59.255 =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 inet6 fe80::3aea:a7ff:fe8d:c1= 6c%igb0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x1 =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 inet6 2602:ffb8::208:72:56:9 = prefixlen 64 =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 media: Ethernet autoselect (1= 000baseT ) =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 status: active =C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 nd6 options=3D21 > Do you have a custom kernel, and if so did you see this note in UPDATIN= G? Yes I do, but it includes all of GENERIC which includes em drivers,=20 otherwise it wouldn't even work with the network card. my custom kernel: include GENERIC ident=C2=A0=C2=A0 CUSTOM makeoptions WITH_EXTRA_TCP_STACKS=3D1 options TCPHPTS options SC_KERNEL_CONS_ATTR=3D(FG_GREEN|BG_BLACK) options IPSTEALTH options=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 AHC_REG_PRETTY_PRINT=C2=A0 # = Print register bitfields in debug options=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0 AHD_REG_PRETTY_PRINT=C2=A0 # = Print register bitfields in debug device cryptodev device aesni I did try without RACK just in case that was the culprit.