Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2003 17:44:25 +1100 From: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au> To: Doug Ambrisko <ambrisko@ambrisko.com> Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Realtek Message-ID: <20030312064424.GB6336@cirb503493.alcatel.com.au> In-Reply-To: <200303111920.h2BJKaEC013582@www.ambrisko.com> References: <200303102102.33694.wes@softweyr.com> <200303111920.h2BJKaEC013582@www.ambrisko.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Mar 11, 2003 at 11:20:36AM -0800, Doug Ambrisko wrote: >Wes Peters writes: >| Flood it with wire speed 64-byte packets and drive it into receive >| interrupt livelock. Yup, the PCI bus is (most of) the problem here too. > >Can't reproduce it. Maybe they fixed it in the 8100L rev.? > >I tried a ping -f -s 22 to hit it with 64 byte packets. I also had >traffic going to the onboard gig and it wasn't impacted (granted the >source was a 100bit link tied to the gig link). Are you sure you were generating "wire speed" packets - this is about 200,000 packets/sec at Fast speed. "ping -f" runs at whatever rate the remote end returns the packets at (or 100pps) - since it (mostly) waits for a response before sending another packet, you will never see livelock. In order to get 200,000 pps, you're going to need 5-10 hosts generating traffic, each with a good NIC and connected to the test system via a decent switch. You also need a proper network benchmarking tool - netperf (ports/netperf) or similar rather than ping. Peter To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030312064424.GB6336>