Re: LOW throughput with pktgen and e1000

2005-12-30 Thread Robert Iakobashvili
Hi Aritz, > As far as I can understand, dma_writeq_full means that the card finds > the rx_ring full and overwrites a previous packet (so that packet is > lost). So how can the rx_discards (packets discarded) counter less > than the dma_writeq_full counter? > > Thank you > Regards > Aritz To decr

Re: LOW throughput with pktgen and e1000

2005-12-30 Thread Lennert Buytenhek
On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 01:34:43AM +0100, Aritz Bastida wrote: > Hello again, Hi, > Now I send you the statistics I have collected in the test I've done. > But before, another problem I didn't tell before, because it didn't > happen always. But it's quite strange. I have used pktgen in quite a

Re: LOW throughput with pktgen and e1000

2005-12-30 Thread Lennert Buytenhek
On Thu, Dec 29, 2005 at 12:29:55AM +0100, Aritz Bastida wrote: > So, after these all tests I'm thinking of using two injector machines > which will send to ksensor, in order to achieve an aggregated > throughput. By the way, if a switch is connected to all these > machines, there wouldn't be any c

Re: LOW throughput with pktgen and e1000

2005-12-28 Thread Aritz Bastida
Hello again, Now I send you the statistics I have collected in the test I've done. But before, another problem I didn't tell before, because it didn't happen always. But it's quite strange. I have used pktgen in quite a few machines and in all of them, if you say clone_skb=1000 or so, the performa

Re: LOW throughput with pktgen and e1000

2005-12-28 Thread Aritz Bastida
Hello again. First of all, thank you all for your replies. I've been working hard for long days and nights before sending this question, but I guess I'm still too newbie in the Linux kernel and specially with hardware matters such as pci, network card specifications, bus latencies, and so on. Firs

Re: LOW throughput with pktgen and e1000

2005-12-28 Thread Lennert Buytenhek
On Wed, Dec 28, 2005 at 09:22:09PM +0100, Aritz Bastida wrote: > Hi. Hi, > First of all, thank you. It seems the problem may be in there. The PCI > buses are actually quite slow. As I told before I have a Pentium 3 > with a e1000 card which achieves 350kpps at most. I have also a > Pentium 4 wi

Re: LOW throughput with pktgen and e1000

2005-12-28 Thread Jesse Brandeburg
On 12/28/05, Aritz Bastida <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi everybody: > > I need to use pktgen for sending packets at very high speed to another > machine, in order to test it under heavy network traffic. All my > previous injection test were done with a dual Pentium III 800 MHz. As > I needed a mo

LOW throughput with pktgen and e1000

2005-12-28 Thread Robert Olsson
Aritz Bastida writes: > I need to use pktgen for sending packets at very high speed to another > machine, in order to test it under heavy network traffic. All my > previous injection test were done with a dual Pentium III 800 MHz. As > I needed a more powerful machine I got a Pentium 4 but th

Re: LOW throughput with pktgen and e1000

2005-12-28 Thread Aritz Bastida
Hi. First of all, thank you. It seems the problem may be in there. The PCI buses are actually quite slow. As I told before I have a Pentium 3 with a e1000 card which achieves 350kpps at most. I have also a Pentium 4 with another e1000 card (the specific models were said in the prev mail). This c

Re: LOW throughput with pktgen and e1000

2005-12-28 Thread Lennert Buytenhek
On Wed, Dec 28, 2005 at 08:12:18PM +0100, Aritz Bastida wrote: > I need to use pktgen for sending packets at very high speed to another > machine, in order to test it under heavy network traffic. All my > previous injection test were done with a dual Pentium III 800 MHz. As > I needed a more power

LOW throughput with pktgen and e1000

2005-12-28 Thread Aritz Bastida
Hi everybody: I need to use pktgen for sending packets at very high speed to another machine, in order to test it under heavy network traffic. All my previous injection test were done with a dual Pentium III 800 MHz. As I needed a more powerful machine I got a Pentium 4 but the results are quite s