Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:49:14 -0700 (MST)
From:      "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
To:        daniel_k_eriksson@telia.com
Cc:        freebsd-stable@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: serious networking (em) performance (ggate and NFS) problem
Message-ID:  <20041119.084914.26958488.imp@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAA0VcX9IoJqUaXPS8MjT1PdsKAAAAQAAAA/qWWqwitlkyUSHwJEUT+bwEAAAAA@telia.com>
References:  <20041118.095348.103081513.imp@bsdimp.com> <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAA0VcX9IoJqUaXPS8MjT1PdsKAAAAQAAAA/qWWqwitlkyUSHwJEUT+bwEAAAAA@telia.com>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
In message: <!~!UENERkVCMDkAAQACAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAABgAAAAAAAAA0VcX9IoJqUaXPS8MjT1PdsKAAAAQAAAA/qWWqwitlkyUSHwJEUT+bwEAAAAA@telia.com>
            "Daniel Eriksson" <daniel_k_eriksson@telia.com> writes:
: Finally, my question. What would you recommend:
: 1) Run with ACPI disabled and debug.mpsafenet=1 and hope that the mix of
: giant-safe and giant-locked (em and ahc) doesn't trigger any bugs. This is
: what I currently do.
: 2) Run with ACPI disabled and debug.mpsafenet=0 and accept lower network
: performance (it is a high-traffic server, so I'm not sure this is a valid
: option).
: 3) Run with ACPI enabled and debug.mpsafenet=1 and accept that em0
: interrupts "leak" to the atapci1+ ithread. This I have done in the past.

I don't know if I'm to a 'recommendation' so much as a 'I'd try your
normal configuration with mpsetfet=0' to see if that makes a
difference in the performance that you see.

Warner



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <http://docs.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20041119.084914.26958488.imp>