From owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jul 22 19:46:17 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: questions@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3A04106566B for ; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 19:46:16 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Received: from smarthost1.sentex.ca (smarthost1-6.sentex.ca [IPv6:2607:f3e0:0:1::12]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B64618FC13 for ; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 19:46:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [IPv6:2607:f3e0:0:4:f025:8813:7603:7e4a] (saphire3.sentex.ca [IPv6:2607:f3e0:0:4:f025:8813:7603:7e4a]) by smarthost1.sentex.ca (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p6MJk933007380; Fri, 22 Jul 2011 15:46:09 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from mike@sentex.net) Message-ID: <4E29D37E.8070908@sentex.net> Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 15:46:06 -0400 From: Mike Tancsa Organization: Sentex Communications User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 6.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "Michael W. Lucas" References: <20110720160432.GA41775@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org> <4D6348DC01B1E406@> <20110720191640.GA42821@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org> <4D301C9702145855@> <20110721141011.GB47190@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org> <4D7F86D5017EB3D8@> <20110721151210.GA47663@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org> <4D301C9702253683@> <4E29BC1F.6060103@sentex.net> <20110722190821.GA55040@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org> In-Reply-To: <20110722190821.GA55040@bewilderbeast.blackhelicopters.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on IPv6:2607:f3e0:0:1::12 Cc: questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: em0 NIC slow on 8.2-p1 amd64? X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 19:46:17 -0000 On 7/22/2011 3:08 PM, Michael W. Lucas wrote: > > Basically the same. I don't think it's disk. Are you able to saturate the ethernet ? Try something like /usr/src/tools/tools/netrate/netblast/netblast on the local ethernet and see if you can generate and receive a full gigabit on the wire # ./netblast 10.11.11.243 500 250 10 start: 1311363559.619619931 finish: 1311363569.619418229 send calls: 5210086 send errors: 1249890 approx send rate: 396019 approx error rate: 0 ./netblast 10.11.11.241 500 300 10 start: 1311346264.584043978 finish: 1311346274.583848423 send calls: 7417664 send errors: 4214676 approx send rate: 320298 approx error rate: 0 When the sender if an igb nic, I am able to push out 955Mb to the em0 nic acting as a sink. The other way around, 855Mb The em nic is em1@pci0:5:0:0: class=0x020000 card=0x34ec8086 chip=0x10d38086 rev=0x00 hdr=0x00 vendor = 'Intel Corporation' device = 'Intel 82574L Gigabit Ethernet Controller (82574L)' class = network subclass = ethernet bar [10] = type Memory, range 32, base 0xb2500000, size 131072, enabled bar [18] = type I/O Port, range 32, base 0x1000, size 32, enabled bar [1c] = type Memory, range 32, base 0xb2520000, size 16384, enabled cap 01[c8] = powerspec 2 supports D0 D3 current D0 cap 05[d0] = MSI supports 1 message, 64 bit cap 10[e0] = PCI-Express 1 endpoint max data 128(256) link x1(x1) cap 11[a0] = MSI-X supports 5 messages in map 0x1c enabled ecap 0001[100] = AER 1 0 fatal 0 non-fatal 1 corrected ecap 0003[140] = Serial 1 001517ffffed36e4 em1: port 0x1000-0x101f mem 0xb2500000-0xb251ffff,0xb2520000-0xb2523fff irq 16 at device 0.0 on pci5 em1: Using MSIX interrupts with 3 vectors em1: [ITHREAD] em1: [ITHREAD] em1: [ITHREAD] em1: Ethernet address: 00:15:17:ed:36:e4 ifstat -b shows # ifstat -b -i igb0 igb0 Kbps in Kbps out 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 578794.0 0.00 855298.0 0.00 855365.9 0.00 855316.6 0.00 855335.2 0.00 855346.5 0.00 855358.6 0.00 855368.7 0.00 855356.6 0.00 727163.6 0.00 0.00 0.00 thats the em equipped machine generating the traffic ---Mike > > There's kern/152828 claiming a performance regression with em under > 8.2, but I'm not sure if that is applicable to my system. I'd upgrade > the kernel to test, but I'm not brave enough to downgrade the kernel > to 8.0 for comparison. (I've never had good luck running an old kernel > on a new userland.) > > ==ml > -- ------------------- Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400 Sentex Communications, mike@sentex.net Providing Internet services since 1994 www.sentex.net Cambridge, Ontario Canada http://www.tancsa.com/