Date: Tue, 30 Sep 2008 22:01:20 +0200 From: Ivan Voras <ivoras@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Optimizing for high PPS, Intel NICs Message-ID: <gbu0im$t4r$1@ger.gmane.org> In-Reply-To: <gbk0j9$cpj$1@ger.gmane.org> References: <gbk0j9$cpj$1@ger.gmane.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigFDB417C7DB23F2FE24BFF4B7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Ivan Voras wrote: > I've noticed something strange: the server is bottlenecked with "em1 > taskq" kernel thread taking 100% of a CPU core, while the global CPU > utilization is around 50%, but the client's em0 taskq thread for this > same load is ~~ 10% (with > 30% idle). The client CPU is a bit faster > then the server (2.4 GHz vs 2.0 GHz) but I don't think this can account= > for such a big difference. Toggling TSO on the server doesn't help. I've switched the server and the client role and the behaviour is always the same - on this one machine the taskq starts using 100% of a core when pushing more than about 150,000 PPS. It's the same when testing under Linux so it looks like I need to shop for a better NIC. Can anyone recommend a good but basic (no fancy features needed) PCI-E or PCI-X NIC that's known to be able to push > 500,000 PPS? --------------enigFDB417C7DB23F2FE24BFF4B7 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkjihZUACgkQldnAQVacBcgmFwCgh4ywiPFeJeQ8P0XKnVxOcuA+ JlEAniwVzZ0ckU1GNQpCsRH3Pv+JAKL4 =0LMd -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigFDB417C7DB23F2FE24BFF4B7--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?gbu0im$t4r$1>