Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 16:35:23 -0300 From: Marcelo Gardini do Amaral <marcelo@registro.br> To: Scott Long <scottl@samsco.org> Cc: Peter Jeremy <peterjeremy@optushome.com.au>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org, Ed Maste <emaste@phaedrus.sandvine.ca> Subject: Re: How to setup polling on 'bge' interface Message-ID: <20060724193523.GB51092@registro.br> In-Reply-To: <44BFA2EE.7060308@samsco.org> References: <20060711190908.GC69272@registro.br> <20060720023856.GA65960@sandvine.com> <20060720112613.GB716@turion.vk2pj.dyndns.org> <44BFA2EE.7060308@samsco.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >The limited testing I've done on a Sun V20z at work suggests that you > >can get better routing throughput in interrupt mode than polling mode. > >YMMV and this is before tweaking the polling parameters. (My testing > >also suggests that I don't really need to do any tweaking because > >the limiting factor is the gigabit interfaces rather than the V20z). I've noticed a higher (and variable) RTT with polling mode activated, without tweaking any parameters. > > This might not apply to bge, but the adaptive polling + fast interrupt > changes that I made to if_em earlier in the year were a huge win over > the standard polling code in terms of CPU utilization and packets per > second. I think it also survived a load that caused normal polling to > essentially livelock the machine. And, it had the advantage of > automatically adapting to bursty loads. -- Att., Marcelo Gardini
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20060724193523.GB51092>