From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Lennert Buytenhek Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] Transmission limit Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2004 19:29:43 +0100 Message-ID: <20041201182943.GA14470@xi.wantstofly.org> References: <16807.20052.569125.686158@robur.slu.se> <1101484740.24742.213.camel@mellia.lipar.polito.it> <41A76085.7000105@draigBrady.com> <1101499285.1079.45.camel@jzny.localdomain> <16811.8052.678955.795327@robur.slu.se> <1101821501.1043.43.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20041130134600.GA31515@xi.wantstofly.org> <1101824754.1044.126.camel@jzny.localdomain> <20041201001107.GE4203@xi.wantstofly.org> <1101863399.4663.54.camel@sfeldma-mobl.dsl-verizon.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: jamal , Robert Olsson , P@draigBrady.com, mellia@prezzemolo.polito.it, e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, Jorge Manuel Finochietto , Giulio Galante , netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: Scott Feldman Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1101863399.4663.54.camel@sfeldma-mobl.dsl-verizon.net> Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Tue, Nov 30, 2004 at 05:09:59PM -0800, Scott Feldman wrote: > This doubles the kpps numbers for 60-byte packets. I'd like to see what > happens on higher bus bandwidth systems. Anyone? Dual Xeon 2.4GHz, a 82540EM and a 82541GI both on 32/66 on separate PCI buses. BEFORE performance is approx the same for both, ~620kpps. AFTER performance is ~730kpps, also approx the same for both. (Note: only sending with one NIC at a time.) Once or twice it went into a state where it started spitting out these kinds of messages and never recovered: Dec 1 19:13:18 phi kernel: NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth1: transmit timed out [...] Dec 1 19:13:31 phi kernel: NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth1: transmit timed out [...] Dec 1 19:13:43 phi kernel: NETDEV WATCHDOG: eth1: transmit timed out But overall, looks good. Strange thing that Robert's numbers didn't improve. Doing some more measurements right now. --L