[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20071002212608.GG29944@bitmover.com>
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 14:26:08 -0700
From: lm@...mover.com (Larry McVoy)
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: lm@...mover.com, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, wscott@...mover.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: tcp bw in 2.6
On Tue, Oct 02, 2007 at 02:16:56PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> We absolutely depend upon people like you to report when there are
> anomalies like this. It's the only thing that scales.
Well cool, finally doing something useful :)
Is this issue no test setup? Because this does seem like something we'd
want to have work well.
> FWIW I have a t1000 Niagara box and an Ultra45 going through a netgear
> gigabit switch. I'm getting 85MB/sec in one direction and 10MB/sec in
> the other (using bw_tcp from lmbench3).
Note that bw_tcp mucks with SND/RCVBUF. It probably shouldn't, it's been
12 years since that code went in there and I dunno if it is still needed.
> Both are using identical
> broadcom tigon3 gigabit chips and identical current kernels so that is
> a truly strange result.
>
> I'll investigate, it may be the same thing you're seeing.
Wow, sounds very similar. In my case I was seeing pretty close to 3x
consistently. You're more like 8x, but I was all e1000 not broadcom.
And note that sky2 doesn't have this problem. Does the broadcom do TSO?
And sky2 not? I noticed a much higher CPU load for sky2.
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitkeeper.com
-
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists