netdev - Re: under-performing bonded interfaces

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, 17 Nov 2011 00:57:29 +0000
From:	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To:	Simon Chen <simonchennj@...il.com>
CC:	Ben Greear <greearb@...delatech.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: under-performing bonded interfaces

On Wed, 2011-11-16 at 19:05 -0500, Simon Chen wrote:
> If used independently, I can get around 9.8Gbps.
[...]
> [   11.572861] ixgbe 0000:03:00.0: (PCI Express:5.0Gb/s:Width x4) e8:9a:8f:23:42:1a
[...]

You need a PCIe 2.0 x8 slot to run 2 10 Gb ports at full speed.  An x4
slot is only good for about 12-13 Gb aggregate throughput (dependent on
packet sizes and other details).

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.

--
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