Re: NVME aborting outstanding i/o

2019-04-05 Thread Patrick M. Hausen
Hi all, > Am 04.04.2019 um 17:11 schrieb Warner Losh : > There's a request that was sent down to the drive. It took longer than 30s to > respond. One of them, at least, was a trim request. > […] Thanks for the explanation. This further explains why I was seeing a lot more of those and the syste

Rare NVME related freeze at boot (was: Re: NVME aborting outstanding i/o)

2019-04-05 Thread Patrick M. Hausen
Hi all, in addition to the aborted commands every dozen of system boots or so (this order of magnitude) the kernel simply hangs during initialisation of one of the NVME devices: https://cloud.hausen.com/s/TxPTDFJwMe6sJr2 The particular device affected is not constant. A power cycle fixes it, th

Re: Rare NVME related freeze at boot (was: Re: NVME aborting outstanding i/o)

2019-04-05 Thread Warner Losh
On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 6:41 AM Patrick M. Hausen wrote: > Hi all, > > in addition to the aborted commands every dozen of system boots or so > (this order of magnitude) the kernel simply hangs during initialisation of > one of the NVME devices: > > https://cloud.hausen.com/s/TxPTDFJwMe6sJr2 > > Th

Re: Rare NVME related freeze at boot (was: Re: NVME aborting outstanding i/o)

2019-04-05 Thread Patrick M. Hausen
Hi! > Am 05.04.2019 um 16:36 schrieb Warner Losh : > What normally comes after the nvme6 line in boot? Often times it's the next > thing after the last message that's the issue, not the last thing. nvme7 ;-) And I had hangs at nvme1, nvme3, … as well. Patrick -- punkt.de GmbH

em performs worse than igb (latency wise) in 12?

2019-04-05 Thread Kris von Mach
Hello, I've upgraded from Stable 11 to Stable 12, and noticed that igb has been removed and is now part of em driver. However, the performance seems a lot worse. This is using HP 366FLR which is just HP's version of Intel i350 I believe. I've tried incorporating the sysctl settings I used in

Re: NVME aborting outstanding i/o

2019-04-05 Thread Warner Losh
On Fri, Apr 5, 2019 at 1:33 AM Patrick M. Hausen wrote: > Hi all, > > > Am 04.04.2019 um 17:11 schrieb Warner Losh : > > There's a request that was sent down to the drive. It took longer than > 30s to respond. One of them, at least, was a trim request. > > […] > > Thanks for the explanation. > >

Re: em performs worse than igb (latency wise) in 12?

2019-04-05 Thread Pete French
On 05/04/2019 16:01, Kris von Mach wrote: I've upgraded from Stable 11 to Stable 12, and noticed that igb has been removed and is now part of em driver. However, the performance seems a lot worse. This is using HP 366FLR which is just HP's version of Intel i350 I believe. Something odd going

Re: em performs worse than igb (latency wise) in 12?

2019-04-05 Thread Kris von Mach
On 4/6/2019 2:56 AM, Pete French wrote: Something odd going on there there - I am using 12-STABLE and I have igb just fine, and it attaches to the same hardware that 11 did: It does work in 12, throughput is great, just that the latency is higher than 11. igb0: flags=8843 metric 0 mtu 1500 o