> On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 12:37:53PM +0200, Danny Braniss wrote:
> D> > On Thu, Dec 22, 2005 at 12:24:42PM +0200, Danny Braniss wrote:
> D> > D> ------------------------------------------------------------
> D> > D> Server listening on TCP port 5001
> D> > D> TCP window size: 64.0 KByte (default)
> D> > D> ------------------------------------------------------------
> D> > D> [ 4] local 132.65.16.100 port 5001 connected with [6.0/SE7501WV2]
> port 58122
> D> > D> (intel westvill)
> D> > D> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> D> > D> [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.01 GBytes 867 Mbits/sec
> D> > D> [ 4] local 132.65.16.100 port 5001 connected with [5.4/SE7501WV2]
> port 55269
> D> > D> (intel westvill)
> D> > D> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> D> > D> [ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 967 MBytes 811 Mbits/sec
> D> > D> [ 5] local 132.65.16.100 port 5001 connected with [6.0/SR1435VP2
> port 58363
> D> > D> (intel dual xeon/emt64)
> D> > D> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> D> > D> [ 5] 0.0-10.0 sec 578 MBytes 485 Mbits/sec
> D> > D>
> D> > D> i've run this several times, and the results are very similar.
> D> > D> i also tried i386, and the same bad results.
> D> > D> all hosts are connected at 1gb to the same switch.
> D> >
> D> > So we see a strong drawback between SE7501WV2 and SR1435VP2. Let's
> compare the NIC
> D> > hardware. Can you plese show pciconf -lv | grep -A3 ^em on both
> motherboards?
> D>
> D> on a SE7501WV2:
> D> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:7:0: class=0x020000 card=0x341a8086 chip=0x10108086
> rev=0x01
> D> hdr=0x00
> D> vendor = 'Intel Corporation'
> D> device = '82546EB Dual Port Gigabit Ethernet Controller (Copper)'
> D> class = network
> D>
> D> on a SR1435VP2:
> D> [EMAIL PROTECTED]:3:0: class=0x020000 card=0x34668086 chip=0x10768086
> rev=0x05
> D> hdr=0x00
> D> vendor = 'Intel Corporation'
> D> device = '82547EI Gigabit Ethernet Controller'
> D> class = network
>
> The first one 82546EB is attached to fast PCI-X bus, and the 82547EI is
> on CSA bus. The CSA bus is twice faster than old PCI bus, CSA can handle
> 266 Mbps. I'm not sure but may be it has same ~50% overhead as old PCI bus.
>
> Probably our em(4) driver is not optimized enough and does too many accesses
> to the PCI bus, thus utilizing more bandwidth than needed to handle traffic.
> In this case we see that NIC on slower bus (but enough to handle Gigabit) is
> must slower than NIC on faster bus. (This paragraph is my own theory, it
> can be complete bullshit.)
humph, alway read the small letters:
from Intel Server Board SE7320VP2 TPC:
... The device interfaces with the 6300ESB ICH from the 32-bit
PCI 2.3 compliant bus running at 33MHz.
so now is back to waiting for Yukon driver from Marvell, which is
supposed to come out RSN.
thanks,
danny
_______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-stable
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
