Subject: SS20 network performance, take 2
To: None <port-sparc@netbsd.org>
From: Tomi Nylund <wizard@in.finland.invalid>
List: port-sparc
Date: 05/20/2002 13:35:18
Hello,
and thanks for all the replies I received.
After weekend, I'm "back by the forge", so it's time to continue
on network performance.
To summarize the many questions:
1) "Can you easily test driver patches on your SS20 to see if they
improve performance for you?"
-Yes, I can do that: the machine serves as a production
firewall, though, but there's not much traffic going
through at this time of year (summer holiday), so
it's not a problem.
2) Will try a new kernel with nsphy enabled
3) The CPU usage during test (534MB file from one side to
another), and other statistics, taken from "systat -w 5 vm":
(somewhat edited for readability)
...
memory totals (in KB)
real virtual free
Active 5748 5748 7089
All 22588 22588 406812
Proc:r d s w Csw Trp Sys Int Sof Flt
3 15 1 34 3250 1
0.2% Sy 0.2% Us 0.0% Ni 81.8% In 17.8% Id
| | | | | | | | | | |
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Interrupts
3239 total
208 lev1
lev4
lev6
2831 lev7
100 clock
lev12
100 prof
...
The reason I started wondering, I had two Big Mac's
(be) on it before, and the performance was *exactly*
the same. Now, switching to two hme's, there's no
difference in performance whatsoever..
Also, if someone would have time to take a look on
my ipmon problem I posted to port-sparc64, I could
switch this one over to Ultra-1 ;) I think it's ipmon
failing silently on file descriptor, diagnosed from
ktrace output..
Regards,
Tomi
PS: Please reply to the mailing list, as my e-mail address
is obfuscated to repel spammers.