On 5/21/07, Kip Macy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi Jack -
I believe I've fixed the sun4v breakage caused by the interrupt filter
changes but it appears that em still isn't working. Does Intel test at
all on big endian hardware? If not, what do you do to avoid breaking
e1000 on Linux?
I've conf
Ours did too prior to the recent import :D
On 5/21/07, Brad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mon, 21 May 2007 20:59:15 -0700
"Kip Macy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi Jack -
> I believe I've fixed the sun4v breakage caused by the interrupt filter
> changes but it appears that em still isn't worki
Hi Jack -
I believe I've fixed the sun4v breakage caused by the interrupt filter
changes but it appears that em still isn't working. Does Intel test at
all on big endian hardware? If not, what do you do to avoid breaking
e1000 on Linux?
Thanks.
-Kip
___
One more thing to remember is to raise the socket size on the linux
sender. I found that I got very poor tx performance on linux running
netperf without making the socket buffers fairy large.
-Kip
On 5/21/07, root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Summary: Using iperf to measure TCP net speed b
Wilkinson, Alex wrote:
0n Mon, May 21, 2007 at 07:39:06PM +0100, Tom Judge wrote:
> I have also seen 700Mb/s sustained FreeBSD - FreeBSD using the openssh HPN
> patch set and no extra tuning of the network stack. Which makes me
> think that maybe the linux stack needs some tun
0n Mon, May 21, 2007 at 07:39:06PM +0100, Tom Judge wrote:
> I have also seen 700Mb/s sustained FreeBSD - FreeBSD using the openssh HPN
> patch set and no extra tuning of the network stack. Which makes me
> think that maybe the linux stack needs some tuning?
What is the "HPN pa
Andre Oppermann wrote:
Synopsis: [ipv6] IPv6-related crash if if_delmulti
Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-net->bms
Responsible-Changed-By: andre
Responsible-Changed-When: Sun May 13 18:36:25 UTC 2007
Responsible-Changed-Why:
Send over to BMS. He's active in that area and may have fixed th
Tom Judge wrote:
> Have you tried upping the MTU, that is if the cards and switch you are
> using support it. I have seen significant speed increases (FreeBSD -
> FreeBSD) in some scenario's twice the through put with an MTU of 8192.
>
> I have also seen 700Mb/s sustained FreeBSD - FreeBSD using t
Hi,
I had a crash on a VPN router today running FAST_IPSEC. The message on
the console was something along the lines of panic sleeping on a non
sleepable lock. The system was a 6.2 RELEASE system running AMD64.
Here is a back trace. Should I open a PR about this?
Tom
> uname -a
FreeBSD n
Hello,
First of, I am not sure if this is the correct mailing list for my
queries. Please do let me know if this isn't the right one.
I am interested in tracking send/recv queues at the transport layer for
TCP and SCTP.
- Is netstat the only way to achieve this tracking?
- With netstat, it
root wrote:
Summary: Using iperf to measure TCP net speed between a linux and
freebsd box over gigE, I see significant speed difference depending on
the data direction. Pushing data from the freebsd box to the linux box,
I average about 500Gb/s. Pushing data from the linux box to the freebsd
b
- Original message -
Summary: Using iperf to measure TCP net speed between...
This is not terribly surprising rx is currently a more expensive
operation than tx on FreeBSD. My testing on 10GigE indicates that
there is ample room for improvement.
-Kip
On 5/21/07, root <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> w
Sastry Tumuluri wrote:
Friends,
I am trying to catch and do some extra processing on LINK_UP and LINK_DOWN
events for my net interfaces (e.g., notify my admin, log the event, ...).
Tried this on both FreeBSD 6.1 and on FreeBSD 6.2.
I tried using the devd.conf file with the following code (shows
Summary: Using iperf to measure TCP net speed between a linux and
freebsd box over gigE, I see significant speed difference depending on
the data direction. Pushing data from the freebsd box to the linux box,
I average about 500Gb/s. Pushing data from the linux box to the freebsd
box, I see abou
Friends,
I am trying to catch and do some extra processing on LINK_UP and LINK_DOWN
events for my net interfaces (e.g., notify my admin, log the event, ...).
Tried this on both FreeBSD 6.1 and on FreeBSD 6.2.
I tried using the devd.conf file with the following code (shows LINK_DOWN;
wrote simila
Hi,
As far as I remember this topic has been already discussed.
There are basically 2 ways of speeding up /etc/services queries:
1. To use /etc/passwd-/pwd.db scheme - i.e. using BDB as the main data
storage and allowing user to update it from /etc/services file by request.
2. Use the separate
Current FreeBSD problem reports
Critical problems
Serious problems
S Tracker Resp. Description
a kern/38554 netchanging interface ipaddress doesn't seem to work
s kern/39937 netipstealth
Ozgur Ozdemircili wrote:
Hello,
I have a network of 10.10.10.0 and the gw is at 10.10.10.1. GW is
giving out ip with DHCP. If the client pc is configured with DHCP they
can get the ip from the server and go out to internet easily. But if
the client has* static Ip configured*, for example 192.168
Monday, May 21, 2007, 11:09:38 AM, Edwin Groothuis wrote:
EG> - Instead of reading and parsing /etc/services every time, use a
EG> hash or btree file a la the aliases database. A hash one (first
EG> key, next key) could be a replacement to use with getservent(),
EG> while a btree one could b
Hello,
I have a network of 10.10.10.0 and the gw is at 10.10.10.1. GW is
giving out ip with DHCP. If the client pc is configured with DHCP they
can get the ip from the server and go out to internet easily. But if
the client has* static Ip configured*, for example 192.168.0.2 with gw
192.168.0.1, t
Edwin Groothuis wrote:
> Hello,
>
> After the last patch I submitted with regarding to /etc/services,
> I was asked if I could see if I could do something about the speed
> of it. Personally I don't worry too much about it, my programs only
> access getservbyname() only once per program :-)
>
> I
On Mon, May 21, 2007 at 09:50:28AM +0300, Niki Denev wrote:
> > Anybody with comments or suggestions from earlier threads like this?
>
> I think there is cached(8) daemon in -current that does exactly this,
> and more. Dunno if it will get in -stable.
I was pointed to that by grog@, but I never h
Hello,
After the last patch I submitted with regarding to /etc/services,
I was asked if I could see if I could do something about the speed
of it. Personally I don't worry too much about it, my programs only
access getservbyname() only once per program :-)
I did some tests with it, and at this mo
23 matches
Mail list logo
