From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Feb 6 13:29:32 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82E6716A41B; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 13:29:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stefan.lambrev@moneybookers.com) Received: from blah.sun-fish.com (blah.sun-fish.com [217.18.249.150]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0540913C45B; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 13:29:31 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from stefan.lambrev@moneybookers.com) Received: by blah.sun-fish.com (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 225FE1B10F2B; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 14:29:30 +0100 (CET) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on blah.cmotd.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.6 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 Received: from hater.haters.org (hater.cmotd.com [192.168.3.125]) by blah.sun-fish.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4477D1B10F1F; Wed, 6 Feb 2008 14:29:27 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <47A9B636.3040509@moneybookers.com> Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 15:29:26 +0200 From: Stefan Lambrev User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071120) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Kris Kennaway References: <4794E6CC.1050107@moneybookers.com> <47A0B023.5020401@moneybookers.com> <47A3074A.3040409@moneybookers.com> <47A72EAB.6070602@moneybookers.com> <20080204182945.GA49276@heff.fud.org.nz> <47A780C0.2060201@moneybookers.com> <47A799A6.3070502@moneybookers.com> <47A84751.8020109@moneybookers.com> <47A8D233.8020506@FreeBSD.org> <47A8DCD6.3060209@moneybookers.com> <47A8E1F1.4040309@FreeBSD.org> <47A98CDC.2090407@moneybookers.com> <47A993D0.1060901@FreeBSD.org> <47A99736.8060809@moneybookers.com> <47A99B16.6030305@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <47A99B16.6030305@FreeBSD.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1251; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.91.2/5711/Wed Feb 6 12:22:58 2008 on blah.cmotd.com X-Virus-Status: Clean Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: network performance X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2008 13:29:32 -0000 Greetings, Kris Kennaway wrote: > Yes, it is gone with 8.0. Disable the module builds because some of > them like this one probably need compile fixes. If you need a subset > of modules use MODULES_OVERRIDE=list (in /etc/make.conf) > Yes, kernel builds. I'm still playing with it, but the first results shows that new kernel can handle 800k incoming packets (well may be more but I have not enough power right now to generate more packets). It still answer only to 250K-260K. I guess I'm hitting the limitation of syncache/syncookies ? Anyway this netisr2 looks like huge improvement :) I can't build kernel without option LOCK_PROFILING with your sources: make -V CFILES -V SYSTEM_CFILES -V GEN_CFILES | MKDEP_CPP="cc -E" CC="cc" xargs mkdep -a -f .newdep -O2 -frename-registers -pipe -fno-strict-aliasing -march=nocona -std=c99 -g -Wall -Wredundant-decls -Wnested-externs -Wstrict-prototypes -Wmissing-prototypes -Wpointer-arith -Winline -Wcast-qual -Wundef -Wno-pointer-sign -fformat-extensions -nostdinc -I. -I/usr/src/sys -I/usr/src/sys/contrib/altq -I/usr/src/sys/contrib/ipfilter -I/usr/src/sys/contrib/pf -I/usr/src/sys/dev/ath -I/usr/src/sys/contrib/ngatm -I/usr/src/sys/dev/twa -I/usr/src/sys/gnu/fs/xfs/FreeBSD -I/usr/src/sys/gnu/fs/xfs/FreeBSD/support -I/usr/src/sys/gnu/fs/xfs -D_KERNEL -DHAVE_KERNEL_OPTION_HEADERS -include opt_global.h -fno-common -finline-limit=8000 --param inline-unit-growth=100 --param large-function-growth=1000 -mcmodel=kernel -mno-red-zone -mfpmath=387 -mno-sse -mno-sse2 -mno-mmx -mno-3dnow -msoft-float -fno-asynchronous-unwind-tables -ffreestanding In file included from /usr/src/sys/netinet/ip_output.c:47: /usr/src/sys/sys/rwlock.h:153:2: error: #error LOCK_DEBUG not defined, include before mkdep: compile failed *** Error code 1 So I added #include , rebuild kernel and tested again w/o LOCK_PROFILING, but results are the same. I'll use again hwpmc and LOCK_PROFILING to see what's going on. And will try the same benchmark on quad core processor as now numbers of cores/cpus matter :) -- Best Wishes, Stefan Lambrev ICQ# 24134177