Re: Re: ixgbe input errors at high data rates

I should also point out that the FLOWID control only exists in 8.X. Oh, and if there is no flow id, then TX uses the queue that is bound on the CPU it is running on of course :) Jack 2010/3/11 Jack Vogel > There is no user control, on the TX side there is a check of the FLOWID of > the packet

Re: Re: ixgbe input errors at high data rates

There is no user control, on the TX side there is a check of the FLOWID of the packet which it gets on RX, if there is one it uses that to determine the right TX queue to use. The TX side also has a flow control but this only exists on the 82599, not 598. The RX/TX queue pairs are bound to a cpu

Re: Un-obsolete'ing ipv6_enable

for brevity sake >> dh> Question 2) Assuming that people do desire consistency with allowing >> dh> for both a global, and a per-interface setting, do you agree with >> dh> having a global default for DHCPv4 (dhcpv4_default_enable), and for >> dh> IPv6 slaac/accept_rtadv  (ipv6-slaac_default_enabl

Re: net80211 and PPI header

On 12 Mar 2010, at 03:40, Alexander Egorenkov wrote: So how soon can we expect A-MPDU support in radiotap header ? I plan to work on it after getting ath into shape regarding 11n RX speeds. -- Rui Paulo ___ freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list

Re: TDMA link cannot pass data

On 12 Mar 2010, at 04:32, batcilla itself wrote: 2010/2/11 Rui Paulo On 10/02/2010 22:24, batcilla itself wrote: On 3 Jan 2010, at 12:23, Kim Culhan wrote: [skip...] This is odd. What happens without the bridge? -- Rui Paulo I guess without the bridge ping going w/o any problem. I a

Re: kern/144572: [carp] CARP preemption mode traffic partially goes to backup node

Old Synopsis: CARP preemption mode traffic partially goes to backup node New Synopsis: [carp] CARP preemption mode traffic partially goes to backup node Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-net Responsible-Changed-By: linimon Responsible-Changed-When: Thu Mar 11 23:38:02 UTC 2010 Res

Re: TDMA link cannot pass data

2010/2/11 Rui Paulo > > On 10/02/2010 22:24, batcilla itself wrote: On 3 Jan 2010, at 12:23, Kim Culhan wrote: >> >> [skip...] >> >>> This is odd. What happens without the bridge? >>> >>> -- >>> Rui Paulo >> >> I guess without the bridge ping going w/o any problem. >> >> I also tried cou

Re: ixgbe input errors at high data rates

I have typically not had the bandwidth to do performance work on the drivers, I am the only FreeBSD engineer in the wired network division here at Intel, however for 10G I have changed the rules and have been working to make the driver perform well. 10G is quite different from 1G, in order for it

Re: net80211 and PPI header

So how soon can we expect A-MPDU support in radiotap header ? On Sun, Feb 21, 2010 at 12:25 AM, Rui Paulo wrote: > On 20 Feb 2010, at 22:11, Sam Leffler wrote: > > > Rui Paulo wrote: > >> On 20 Feb 2010, at 21:51, Sam Leffler wrote: > >>> Alexander Egorenkov wrote: > > What exactly do you ne

Re: ixgbe input errors at high data rates

Jack Vogel wrote: Similarly, I have done lots of work in two years to the ixgbe driver, I would even suggest that once you have 8 installed you get the driver from HEAD. You mean the driver in 8.0 isn't good enough and I'd need to somehow mix the driver from CURRENT with the rest of 8.0? ___

Re: Sudden mbuf demand increase and shortage under the load (igb issue?)

I've dug around in the source repo... it appears the new code is just shy of being MFC'd. Any known caveats with the new code or is it by all accounts good to go? I'm going to try testing it in 8.0. Thanks Charles Owens Great Bay Software, Inc. Charles Owens wrote: > Hello Jack, > > We're

Re: ixgbe input errors at high data rates

Jack Vogel wrote: The 1.3.3 driver is two years old, and your OS is older. I would respectfully suggest that you update to 8.0 where lots of effort was put to make 10G hardware perform up to its capabilities. Similarly, I have done lots of work in two years to the ixgbe driver, I would even sug

Re: Sudden mbuf demand increase and shortage under the load (igb issue?)

Hello Jack, We're seeing iffy behavior with igb on FreeBSD 8.0-RELEASE on a new Intel server box (based on their S5520UR motherboard). So far we've seen only oddness with link-state (it wants to always say "active", with no cable plugged in, unless we do an ifconfig up/down/up), but I'm concerned

Re: ixgbe input errors at high data rates

The 1.3.3 driver is two years old, and your OS is older. I would respectfully suggest that you update to 8.0 where lots of effort was put to make 10G hardware perform up to its capabilities. Similarly, I have done lots of work in two years to the ixgbe driver, I would even suggest that once you hav

Re: Un-obsolete'ing ipv6_enable

On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 11:59 PM, Hiroki Sato wrote: > David Horn wrote >  in <25ff90d61003082037v3519995bx7e119e9d14143...@mail.gmail.com>: > > dh> The question is what is the desired end-state for the rc.conf > dh> configuration of ipv6 ? > dh> > dh> Do we want to have a per-interface setting re

Re: kern/144642: [rum] [panic] Enabling rum interface causes panic

Old Synopsis: Enabling rum interface causes panic New Synopsis: [rum] [panic] Enabling rum interface causes panic Responsible-Changed-From-To: freebsd-bugs->freebsd-net Responsible-Changed-By: linimon Responsible-Changed-When: Thu Mar 11 16:00:34 UTC 2010 Responsible-Changed-Why: Over to maintain

ixgbe input errors at high data rates

Hi, our Intel 10 GigE cards are finally here, identified as with the driver ixgbe-1.3.3 off the CD-ROM. One card is used for input, the other for output, doing traffic limiting (dummynet) and accounting in between. At data rates of about 700-1000 mbps netstat -i shows many Input errors on ix0 a

6to4/stf relay

Hi Trying to understand something.. stf0 in FreeBSD has a non-changeable mtu of 1280. If you're setting up a 6to4-relay using FreeBSD doesn't this break stuff for other end-hosts using your relay? Linux for example has a default MTU of 1480. Sincerely, Sebastian H _