Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 22 Jun 2006 16:26:20 +0100 | From | Pádraig Brady <> | Subject | Re: Dropping Packets in 2.6.17 |
| |
Danial Thom wrote: > > --- Pádraig Brady <P@draigBrady.com> wrote: > >>For reference with 2.4.20 on a dual 3.4GHz xeon >>and 2 x e1000 cards, I was able to capture, >>classify and do statistical calculations >>on 625Kpps per interface (1.3 million pps). > > Unfortunately I can do that much with FreeBSD 4.x > with 1 2.0Ghz opteron, so its not a very > compelling case to have to spend twice as much on > hardware to use LINUX. However 2.4 seemed much > better than 2.6 in this regard. 2.6 wants to drop > a lot more packets. The goal of using 2.6 is to > utilize DP better, but it obviously has to > perform better than a UP Freebsd box.
NC.
> What ITR setting are using for the e1000 driver?
I didn't use ITR, I used NAPI.
>># Lots of kernel memory needed for e1000 >>vm.min_free_kbytes = 65535 > > > I'm curious as to why a vm setting is useful, as > it doesn't seem that the e1000 driver uses > virtual memory? Since rings are replenished with > sk_buffs, and sk_buffs have to be contiguous, how > does vm come into play?
Contiguous? The [tr]x descriptors contain pointers to the skbufs. Anyway I bypassed the large allocation overhead by using skb recycling.
Pádraig. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |