On 04-09-2018 10:16, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-09-03 at 16:47 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
>> On 03-09-2018 16:38, Jerome Brunet wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2018-09-03 at 16:22 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
On 03-09-2018 15:10, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-09-03 at 12:47 +0100, Jose
On Mon, 2018-09-03 at 16:47 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
> On 03-09-2018 16:38, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> > On Mon, 2018-09-03 at 16:22 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
> > > On 03-09-2018 15:10, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> > > > On Mon, 2018-09-03 at 12:47 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
> > > > > On 03-09-2018 11:16,
On 03-09-2018 16:38, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-09-03 at 16:22 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
>> On 03-09-2018 15:10, Jerome Brunet wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2018-09-03 at 12:47 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
On 03-09-2018 11:16, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> No notable change. Rx is fine but Tx:
> [
On Mon, 2018-09-03 at 16:22 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
> On 03-09-2018 15:10, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> > On Mon, 2018-09-03 at 12:47 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
> > > On 03-09-2018 11:16, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> > > > No notable change. Rx is fine but Tx:
> > > > [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 3.55 MBytes 29.8
On 03-09-2018 15:10, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-09-03 at 12:47 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
>> On 03-09-2018 11:16, Jerome Brunet wrote:
>>> No notable change. Rx is fine but Tx:
>>> [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 3.55 MBytes 29.8 Mbits/sec 51 12.7 KBytes
>>>
>>> I suppose the problem as
On Mon, 2018-09-03 at 12:47 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
> On 03-09-2018 11:16, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> > No notable change. Rx is fine but Tx:
> > [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 3.55 MBytes 29.8 Mbits/sec 51 12.7 KBytes
> >
> > I suppose the problem as something to do with the retries. When doing Tx
On 03-09-2018 11:16, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> No notable change. Rx is fine but Tx:
> [ 5] 3.00-4.00 sec 3.55 MBytes 29.8 Mbits/sec 51 12.7 KBytes
>
> I suppose the problem as something to do with the retries. When doing Tx test
> alone, we don't have such a things a throughput where we
On Mon, 2018-09-03 at 10:36 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
> Hi Jerome,
>
> On 03-09-2018 09:56, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> > On Thu, 2018-08-30 at 11:37 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
> > > [ As for now this is only for testing! ]
> > >
> > > This follows David Miller advice and tries to fix coalesce timer in
Hi Jerome,
On 03-09-2018 09:56, Jerome Brunet wrote:
> On Thu, 2018-08-30 at 11:37 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
>> [ As for now this is only for testing! ]
>>
>> This follows David Miller advice and tries to fix coalesce timer in
>> multi-queue scenarios.
>>
>> We are now using per-queue coalesce
On Thu, 2018-08-30 at 11:37 +0100, Jose Abreu wrote:
> [ As for now this is only for testing! ]
>
> This follows David Miller advice and tries to fix coalesce timer in
> multi-queue scenarios.
>
> We are now using per-queue coalesce values and per-queue TX timer. This
> assumes that tx_queues ==
10 matches
Mail list logo