Luigi Rizzo wrote:
On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 08:11:41AM -0500, Ryan Stone wrote:
On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 4:40 AM, Joe Holden <li...@rewt.org.uk> wrote:
doh, running kernel wasn't as GENERIC as I thought it was, looks like
device polling not only breaks dynamic ticks but also reduces rx ability
significantly, exactly 150,000 pps per 1000hz on igb versus 650,000 without
Is this a known issue? (and if device polling isn't as useful as it once
was, should it be removed?)
Device polling on modern multiqueue NICs isn't very useful because you're
limited to a single thread for handling packets. I have a patch that fixes
this that I've let fall by the wayside.
the 150,000 is result of the combination of the default value of
sysctl kern.polling.burst_max and kern.polling.idle_poll=0
(i think this is the default value for the latter).
The 150 was sized for the peak pps on a 100Mbit/s interface,
back in 2001. You should at least be able to raise the number
and see what kind of throughput you can achieve.
This said, modern nics also have interrupt moderation so you
don't really need polling.
cheers
luigi
Hi Luigi,
This makes sense, am I likely to achieve better throughput (in the
forwarding path at this point) with netisr rather than polling,
especially as mentioned above the igb does indeed have multiple queues
for rx?
On another note, is netmap usable in the forwarding context at all as it
is rather awesome
Thanks,
Joe
_______________________________________________
freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
