Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 11:48:23 +0100 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Questions on processing smaller frame size Message-ID: <go37mi$9eu$1@ger.gmane.org> In-Reply-To: <a27b90e40902250239x414d3fa7l12d291d278162377@mail.gmail.com> References: <a27b90e40902242314w12c15fddma43e1cd5afec8938@mail.gmail.com> <20090225075310.GA85904@svzserv.kemerovo.su> <a27b90e40902250239x414d3fa7l12d291d278162377@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig69E41D4C44B97AD296C94242 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Siquijor Philips wrote: > Hello Eugene, >=20 >> Traffic bandwidth does not matter (or much less), PPS rate matters. >> Packets drop due to high pps rate. Higher packet size, lesser pps >> saturates link and pps just can't grow high. It can with smaller packe= ts. >> >=20 > All the test scenarios here are bombarded with 1-Gig of network > traffic. When packet drops due to high pps rate, meaning to say that > the current FreeBSD system can't still handle this kind of situation > with high packet rate?=20 Not unlikely. See other similar findings by other users, usually also with em cards. > Or just it depends on your hardware? I just > can't imagine that with 2x quad-core system processing on high packet > rate, average CPU utilization consumes a total of 98%. Total =3D across all CPUs? Try reducing the number of CPUs, it might help= by reducing contention. >> I've tried to make FreeBSD 7.1 act as packet generator >> with Intel dualcore 2.8Ghz processor and onboard gigabit ethernet em0 >> using ng_source(4) low-overhead packet emitter. And it can't saturate >> gigabit link with UDP packets (64 bytes payload, 130 bytes at wire - >> including inter-packet gaps, FCSs etc.) >> >> It takes all CPU cycles of one 2.8Ghz core to send 750Kpps - >=20 > Maybe there's a way we can optimize this, but just don't know how and > what particular component to optimize? There is a very experimental patch to the em driver, not endorsed by the em driver author (for unknown reasons) that some users claim helps with SMP performance. See http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net/2008-December/020441.html --------------enig69E41D4C44B97AD296C94242 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFJpSIBldnAQVacBcgRAvGvAJ99YslOqGaklehf6uQjLrAEm/hJ6gCgyTUd rf3LDBNfsymm+jxbN0WHyU0= =mjmo -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig69E41D4C44B97AD296C94242--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?go37mi$9eu$1>