From: John Bermudez <jbermudez@vnocservice.com>
To: "Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>
Cc: "e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net"
<e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"Ronciak, John" <john.ronciak@intel.com>
Subject: Re: e1000 - rx misses
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2011 15:00:42 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <2DF55ECAAA7FFF478FB4ED007EF478E7656B1010BB@NETS.hillside.glowpoint.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.WNT.2.00.1103011658050.5424@JBRANDEB-DESK2.amr.corp.intel.com>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5701 bytes --]
Jesse,
Thanks for your time.
your answers have pointed me in the right direction
which has let me do hours of positive research
so this leads me to one final question ( I hope ;) )
lspci -v shows that the latency for the Ethernet device(s)
is 0
Is this the default value populated by the e1000 driver??
or who's responsibility is it to populate this value
i.e.
04:00.1 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation: Unknown device 105e (rev 06)
Subsystem: Intel Corporation: Unknown device 346e
Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 18
Memory at b8920000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=128K]
Memory at b8900000 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=128K]
I/O ports at 3000 [size=32]
Expansion ROM at fffe0000 [disabled] [size=128K]
Capabilities: [c8] Power Management version 2
Capabilities: [d0] Message Signalled Interrupts: 64bit+ Queue=0/0 Enable-
Capabilities: [e0] #10 [0001]
Thank you and have a nice day,
Mr. John Bermudez
NOC Level 3 Engineer
-----Original Message-----
From: Brandeburg, Jesse [mailto:jesse.brandeburg@intel.com]
Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2011 5:02 PM
To: John Bermudez
Cc: Ronciak, John; Kirsher, Jeffrey T; netdev@vger.kernel.org; e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: RE: e1000 - rx misses
<removed non-relevant users>
On Tue, 1 Mar 2011, John Bermudez wrote:
> Thanks for your time
> Can you tell me the command to lengthen the input fifo rx queue?
> is this possible
You can try increasing the number of rx buffers via the command
# ethtool -G ethX rx 4096
and if you were really gung ho, you could increase the amount of fifo
allocated to the rx side of the fifo by modifying the source. That said,
I don't think that will buy you anything because it seems from the small
amount of data provided that you are having exceptionally long periods of
time where the data is coming faster than your machine can process (for
whatever reason) and increasing the fifo only will give you a marginal
(4kB or so) increasing in buffering.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brandeburg, Jesse [mailto:jesse.brandeburg@intel.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 11:05 AM
> To: John Bermudez
> Cc: cramerj; Ronciak, John; Kirsher, Jeffrey T; Kok, Auke-jan H; netdev@vger.kernel.org; e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: Re: e1000 - rx misses
>
> added e1000-devel, responses inline...
>
> On Wed, 23 Feb 2011, John Bermudez wrote:
>
> > Hello All,
> > I got your contact info in a forum.
> > maybe you could give me a quick pointer.
> >
> > I have a device that is experiencing RX misses. I tried 1000/full and 100/full
> > it occurs at both speeds. I seem to get a burst of loss so I am assuming I am overrunning the FIFO RX queue.
>
> overrunning at 100Mb/s seems pretty unlikely to be our hardware's fault,
> as your buffer (in time) is increasing by 10x.
>
> >
> > Any known workarounds?
> > Configuration modifications?
> >
> > your time is much appreciated
> >
> >
> >
> > /lib/modules/2.4.31-uc0/kernel/drivers/net/e1000
> > # ls
> > e1000.o
>
> ow, 2.4.31 kernel is pretty much so old as to not be supportable.
>
> > # ethtool -S eth1
> > NIC statistics:
> > rx_packets: 217454512
> > tx_packets: 266698397
> > rx_bytes: 172995819593
> > tx_bytes: 246744709750
> > rx_broadcast: 0
> > tx_broadcast: 528
> <snip>
> > rx_no_buffer_count: 925
>
> This count above indicates that your cpu is not returning buffers to
> hardware fast enough. Do you have NAPI enabled?
>
> > rx_missed_errors: 48206
>
> This error means that for the length of time the fifo was buffering the
> adapter was not able to get any data buffers from the OS, filled the FIFO
> and had to drop this many packets.
>
> > 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: 0
> > tx_single_coll_ok: 0
> > tx_multi_coll_ok: 0
> > tx_timeout_count: 0
> > tx_restart_queue: 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
>
> flow control is either not happenning or is disabled, if it is disabled
> you could try enabling it on both ends to get a little more buffering in
> your switch.
>
> > rx_long_byte_count: 172995819593
> > rx_csum_offload_good: 217406235
> > rx_csum_offload_errors: 17
> > rx_header_split: 0
> > alloc_rx_buff_failed: 0
> > tx_smbus: 0
> > rx_smbus: 5262
>
> hm, you have IPMI traffic, could these be related to your stalls?
>
> > dropped_smbus: 0
> > #
> >
> >
> > Thank you and have a nice day,
> >
> > Mr. John Bermudez
> > NOC Level 3 Engineer
> >
> >
>
> You didn't include lots of data we need, like hardware type, adapter/chip,
> ethtool -i output, cat /proc/interrupts, system info, .config, etc.
>
> I suggest that something is running either in interrupt context on your
> system for a very long time (keeping us from running our interrupt
> handler) or that your cpu is underpowered and unable to keep up with
> whatever tasks it is running besides the network driver.
>
> If you wish to continue troubleshooting please file a bug at e1000.sf.net
> and attach the requested info there.
>
> Jesse
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/plain, Size: 429 bytes --]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Software Download: Index, Search & Analyze Logs and other IT data in
Real-Time with Splunk. Collect, index and harness all the fast moving IT data
generated by your applications, servers and devices whether physical, virtual
or in the cloud. Deliver compliance at lower cost and gain new business
insights. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-dev2dev
[-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 257 bytes --]
_______________________________________________
E1000-devel mailing list
E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel
To learn more about Intel® Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-03 20:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <2DF55ECAAA7FFF478FB4ED007EF478E7656B070D76@NETS.hillside.glowpoint.com>
2011-02-28 19:04 ` e1000 - rx misses Brandeburg, Jesse
2011-03-02 0:14 ` John Bermudez
2011-03-02 1:01 ` Brandeburg, Jesse
2011-03-02 10:23 ` denys
2011-03-03 20:00 ` John Bermudez [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=2DF55ECAAA7FFF478FB4ED007EF478E7656B1010BB@NETS.hillside.glowpoint.com \
--to=jbermudez@vnocservice.com \
--cc=e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
--cc=john.ronciak@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox