From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Apr 13 21:27:50 2007 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7822A16A406; Fri, 13 Apr 2007 21:27:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rea-fbsd@codelabs.ru) Received: from pobox.codelabs.ru (pobox.codelabs.ru [144.206.177.45]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AAC513C48C; Fri, 13 Apr 2007 21:27:50 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from rea-fbsd@codelabs.ru) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=simple; s=one; d=codelabs.ru; h=Received:Date:From:To:Cc:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To:Sender:X-Spam-Status:Subject; b=eFRBqezfLbmUh0D4aD5QC7ObF/JnJRqalbYYbNob8Pg1R3KVeMPZDJA4WG00ojdkDbdmY+GewbrY8GXrNWmb2I8CwT97GUIroa91kaZGsOkzdcQMQQAn2LCtyT4lUL7XjgdBhtTuGPRNxnRpCMsoeFzLD8g9F4HBr2nUWQSxPqY=; Received: from codelabs.ru (pobox.codelabs.ru [144.206.177.45]) by pobox.codelabs.ru with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) id 1HcTJ5-000Lsw-QA; Sat, 14 Apr 2007 01:27:49 +0400 Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2007 01:27:43 +0400 From: Eygene Ryabinkin To: Nate Lawson Message-ID: <20070413212742.GH49158@codelabs.ru> References: <4617D3A6.8000201@root.org> <20070409094010.GL26348@codelabs.ru> <461FDD28.6030502@root.org> <20070413204237.GG49158@codelabs.ru> <461FEE6D.4030201@root.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <461FEE6D.4030201@root.org> Sender: rea-fbsd@codelabs.ru X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=4.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 Cc: max@love2party.net, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, pf@freebsd.org Subject: Re: call for testers: altq in current 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, 13 Apr 2007 21:27:50 -0000 Nate, Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 01:56:13PM -0700, Nate Lawson wrote: > > Yes, the numbers are perfectly correct. I will try to redo the > > tests on Monday (when I will be able to use the LAN link) and > > will watch for this debug information. Any other recommendations > > are, of course, welcome. > > Ok, that is good to know the code is running and the freq values are > correct. Can you verify through some other cpu benchmark test that the > freq actually did change to the value printed? Will try, but it is changing to 2200 MHz while I am doing the CPU-intensive tasks (compilation of something big) and the debug printf's are telling about 2200 MHz as well. Not so good benchmark, but at least something. > Also, make sure you're not using the TSC timecounter. sysctl > kern.timecounter I am just using the defaults for the -CURRENT. Can not verify them now -- my -CURRENT is crashing with the modem link, so I am either writing mails or doing the tests, sorry. > >>> First two logs, ifstat.bw3Kb.old.wan.log and ifstat.bw3Kb.new.wan.log > >>> do show the WAN results. The 100 Kbps corresponds to 400 MHz, 200 > >>> Kbps -- to 800 MHz, 410 Kbps -- to 1600 MHz and 560 Kbps -- to 2200 > >>> MHz CPU speed. I thought that I was bounded by the WAN link here. > >> What was the CPU speed on bootup? > > > > 2200 MHz. > > I don't understand those values. Didn't you setup a constant 3 Kb/sec > link? so why would you be getting even 100 Kbps at 400 Mhz? Yep, that was the constant 3Kbps. I do not understand the measured values too. > On the new code but without loading cpufreq and leaving the freq at 2200 > Mhz, do you get the right numbers? Are they constant? Monday will reveal the things. Will post an update. Thank you! -- Eygene