Re: e1000 poor network performance - 2.6.17-rc5-g705af309

Re: e1000 poor network performance - 2.6.17-rc5-g705af309

[Jesse Brandeburg]

On 5/26/06, Aravind Gottipati <aravind@freeshell.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I recently started running linux on a new x60 thinkpad and started
> noticing really poor network performance with this kernel.  I saw some
> archived threads from a while back saying this could be related to
> conntracking.  Disabled that (rmmod ip_conntrack) did not fix the
> problem.  I also tried disabling tso but that didn't have any effect
> either.  I can reproduce the problem when connected to a 100Mbps switch
> (I don't have a GigE network to test this with).

First, lets move this over to netdev (see CC)

> This laptop uses the Intel 82573L (PCI-Express) chip.  I'd be glad to
> assist with any toubleshooting/testing w.r.t this.  I am not subscribed
> to the list, so please cc me on any replies.

What kind of poor performance?  what test? please send the output of
ethtool -e ethX and ethtool -S ethX after you've been having problems.

please provide more details and we can see if we can help.

Jesse

Re: e1000 poor network performance - 2.6.17-rc5-g705af309

[Aravind Gottipati]

On Sat, May 27, 2006 at 02:10:17PM -0700, Jesse Brandeburg wrote:
> What kind of poor performance?  what test? please send the output of
> ethtool -e ethX and ethtool -S ethX after you've been having problems.

I first noticed the problem (slow speed) when pinging sites.  I then
noticed that the problem occured on normal ssh sessions and ftp/http
downloads as well.  I have a spare pcmcia card that I am using on the
same laptop so I have something to compare it against.  In all the
readings below, eth0 is the builtin Intel 82573L (PCI-Express) card and
eth2 is a pcmcia D-link card (8139too driver).

You can see below the ping times varying randomly through eth0.  Compare
these with the ping times through eth2 (at the bottom).  Also there are
some collisions in the ethtool -S output here (I am on a 10/100 hub),  I
see the same performance using a switch as well.

I am not subscribed to the list, so please cc me on your responses.

Thank you,

Aravind.

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
ping via eth0

root@dogmatrix:~# ping www.google.com
PING www.l.google.com (66.102.7.99): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=0 ttl=239 time=135.0 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=1 ttl=239 time=601.3 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=2 ttl=239 time=133.2 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=3 ttl=239 time=904.8 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=4 ttl=239 time=131.3 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=5 ttl=239 time=1001.3 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=6 ttl=239 time=129.4 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=7 ttl=239 time=1001.5 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=8 ttl=239 time=127.5 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=9 ttl=239 time=1001.0 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=10 ttl=239 time=125.2 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=11 ttl=239 time=19.8 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=12 ttl=239 time=123.2 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=13 ttl=239 time=1001.3 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=14 ttl=239 time=121.4 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=15 ttl=239 time=1001.4 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=16 ttl=239 time=119.5 ms

--- www.l.google.com ping statistics ---
17 packets transmitted, 17 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 19.8/451.6/1001.5 ms

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

root@dogmatrix:~# ethtool -e eth0
Offset          Values
------          ------
0x0000          00 0a e4 3f a5 da 30 0b b2 ff 51 00 ff ff ff ff 
0x0010          53 00 03 02 6b 02 7e 20 aa 17 9a 10 86 80 df 80 
0x0020          00 00 00 20 54 7e 00 00 14 00 da 00 04 00 00 27 
0x0030          c9 6c 50 31 3e 07 0b 04 8b 29 00 00 00 f0 02 0f 
0x0040          08 10 00 00 04 0f ff 7f 01 4d ff ff ff ff ff ff 
0x0050          14 00 1d 00 14 00 1d 00 af aa 1e 00 00 00 1d 00 
0x0060          00 01 00 40 1f 12 07 40 ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff 
0x0070          ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff ff 73 79 

root@dogmatrix:~# ethtool -S eth0
NIC statistics:
     rx_packets: 1757
     tx_packets: 1995
     rx_bytes: 657421
     tx_bytes: 228828
     rx_errors: 0
     tx_errors: 0
     tx_dropped: 0
     multicast: 0
     collisions: 13
     rx_length_errors: 0
     rx_over_errors: 0
     rx_crc_errors: 0
     rx_frame_errors: 0
     rx_no_buffer_count: 0
     rx_missed_errors: 0
     tx_aborted_errors: 0
     tx_carrier_errors: 0
     tx_fifo_errors: 0
     tx_heartbeat_errors: 0
     tx_window_errors: 0
     tx_abort_late_coll: 0
     tx_deferred_ok: 27
     tx_single_coll_ok: 2
     tx_multi_coll_ok: 5
     tx_timeout_count: 0
     rx_long_length_errors: 0
     rx_short_length_errors: 0
     rx_align_errors: 0
     tx_tcp_seg_good: 0
     tx_tcp_seg_failed: 0
     rx_flow_control_xon: 0
     rx_flow_control_xoff: 0
     tx_flow_control_xon: 0
     tx_flow_control_xoff: 0
     rx_long_byte_count: 657421
     rx_csum_offload_good: 1709
     rx_csum_offload_errors: 0
     rx_header_split: 1433
     alloc_rx_buff_failed: 0
root@dogmatrix:~# 

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
The same ping using eth2

root@dogmatrix:~# ping www.google.com
PING www.l.google.com (66.102.7.99): 56 data bytes
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=0 ttl=239 time=16.3 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=1 ttl=239 time=15.2 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=2 ttl=239 time=14.8 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=3 ttl=239 time=15.1 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=4 ttl=239 time=16.6 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=5 ttl=239 time=15.8 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=6 ttl=239 time=14.9 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=7 ttl=239 time=14.7 ms
64 bytes from 66.102.7.99: icmp_seq=8 ttl=239 time=14.6 ms

--- www.l.google.com ping statistics ---
9 packets transmitted, 9 packets received, 0% packet loss
round-trip min/avg/max = 14.6/15.3/16.6 ms

Re: e1000 poor network performance - 2.6.17-rc5-g705af309

[Stephen Hemminger]

On Sun, 28 May 2006 07:43:10 +0000
Aravind Gottipati <aravind@freeshell.org> wrote:

> On Sat, May 27, 2006 at 02:10:17PM -0700, Jesse Brandeburg wrote:
> > What kind of poor performance?  what test? please send the output of
> > ethtool -e ethX and ethtool -S ethX after you've been having problems.
> 
> I first noticed the problem (slow speed) when pinging sites.  I then
> noticed that the problem occured on normal ssh sessions and ftp/http
> downloads as well.  I have a spare pcmcia card that I am using on the
> same laptop so I have something to compare it against.  In all the
> readings below, eth0 is the builtin Intel 82573L (PCI-Express) card and
> eth2 is a pcmcia D-link card (8139too driver).
> 
> You can see below the ping times varying randomly through eth0.  Compare
> these with the ping times through eth2 (at the bottom).  Also there are
> some collisions in the ethtool -S output here (I am on a 10/100 hub),  I
> see the same performance using a switch as well.
> 
> I am not subscribed to the list, so please cc me on your responses.
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Aravind.

What is the interrupt assignment on this machine? 
	cat /proc/interrupts

Re: e1000 poor network performance - 2.6.17-rc5-g705af309

[Aravind Gottipati]

On Sun, May 28, 2006 at 09:04:09AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> What is the interrupt assignment on this machine? 
> 	cat /proc/interrupts

root@dogmatrix:~# cat /proc/interrupts 
           CPU0       
  0:     250325    IO-APIC-edge  timer
  1:        386    IO-APIC-edge  i8042
  8:          1    IO-APIC-edge  rtc
  9:        208   IO-APIC-level  acpi
 12:       3000    IO-APIC-edge  i8042
 14:         38    IO-APIC-edge  ide0
 20:       3815   IO-APIC-level  libata, yenta, uhci_hcd:usb2, eth0, i915@pci:0000:00:02.0
 21:          2   IO-APIC-level  ohci1394, uhci_hcd:usb3
 22:          0   IO-APIC-level  sdhci:slot0, uhci_hcd:usb4
 23:         78   IO-APIC-level  ehci_hcd:usb1, uhci_hcd:usb5
NMI:          0 
LOC:     242918 
ERR:          0
MIS:          0
root@dogmatrix:~#