netdev - Re: e1000 full-duplex TCP performance well below wire speed

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:50:14 -0500
From:	David Acker <dacker@...net.com>
To:	Bill Fink <billfink@...dspring.com>
CC:	SANGTAE HA <sangtae.ha@...il.com>,
	Bruce Allen <ballen@...vity.phys.uwm.edu>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: e1000 full-duplex TCP performance well below wire speed

Bill Fink wrote:
> If the receive direction uses a different GigE NIC that's part of the
> same quad-GigE, all is fine:
> 
> [bill@...nce4 ~]$ nuttcp -f-beta -Itx -w2m 192.168.6.79 & nuttcp -f-beta -Irx -r -w2m 192.168.5.79
> tx:  1186.5051 MB /  10.05 sec =  990.2250 Mbps 12 %TX 13 %RX 0 retrans
> rx:  1186.7656 MB /  10.05 sec =  990.5204 Mbps 15 %TX 14 %RX 0 retrans
Could this be an issue with pause frames?  At a previous job I remember 
having issues with a similar configuration using two broadcom sb1250 3 
gigE port devices. If I ran bidirectional tests on a single pair of 
ports connected via cross over, it was slower than when I gave each 
direction its own pair of ports.  The problem turned out to be that 
pause frame generation and handling was not configured correctly.
-Ack
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html