959123
> dev.ix.1.mac_stats.rx_frames_65_127: 4610233544
> dev.ix.1.mac_stats.rx_frames_128_255: 256517169
> dev.ix.1.mac_stats.rx_frames_256_511: 304326606
> dev.ix.1.mac_stats.rx_frames_512_1023: 223999237
> dev.ix.1.mac_stats.rx_frames_1024_1522: 591102680
> dev.ix.1.mac_stats.recv_undersized: 0
&g
If you are having high interrupt rate, it will be same on latest 10-STABLE.
Are you using an unsupported SFP?
> Guy Helmer <mailto:guy.hel...@gmail.com>
> May 28, 2015 at 6:24 PM
>> On May 23, 2015, at 1:14 PM, Babak Farrokhi wrote:
>>
>> Look at the interrupts per
I ran into the same problem with almost the same hardware (Intel X520)
on 10-STABLE. HT/SMT is disabled and cards are configured with 8 queues,
with the same sysctl tunings as sobomax@ did. I am not using lagg, no
FLOWTABLE.
I experimented with pmcstat (RESOURCE_STALLS) a while ago and here [1]
[2
ICYMI: http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=147405177724268&w=2
Google submitted their own TCP CC algorithm to upstream. This algorithm has
been widely in use in their network.
This looks very interesting and it would be great if someone could port it to
FreeBSD.
Any thoughts?
-
Hi all,
I encountered a new behavior with ixgbe interrupt rates on 11-STABLE which
was not present in 10-STABLE.
We disable aim and manually set the interrupt rate. On 10-STABLE the interrupt
rate will not exceed the configured value, but it is not the case in 11-STABLE.
I am wondering if this
Hi,
Could this be incidentally related to this PR? [1]
[1] https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=220217
On 19 Jul 2017, at 12:23, Muenz, Michael wrote:
> Hi,
>
> seems this is a rather old topic but I want to check if there's perhaps some
> progress or chance to get this done.
> I
farrokhi added a subscriber: farrokhi.
REVISION DETAIL
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D1944
EMAIL PREFERENCES
https://reviews.freebsd.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/
To: nvass-gmx.com, bz, trociny, kristof, gnn, glebius, rodrigc, zec
Cc: farrokhi, julian, robak, freebsd-virtualization-list
