From: Jean Tourrilhes <jt@bougret.hpl.hp.com>
To: rmk@arm.linux.org.uk,
Linux kernel mailing list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Martin Diehl <lists@mdiehl.de>
Subject: Re: [Serial 2.5]: packet drop problem (FE ?)
Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2002 18:40:58 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20021108024058.GA1266@bougret.hpl.hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20021108004924.H11437@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 12:49:24AM +0000, Russell King wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 07, 2002 at 04:41:55PM -0800, Jean Tourrilhes wrote:
> > Is there a way to see the current flag configuration of the
> > port with setserial or /proc ?
>
> stty -a -F /dev/ttySx
>
> should do the trick.
>
> --
> Russell King
More data...
I rebooted my 2.5.X box with 2.4.X (still SMP).
If I use the same traffic as before (unidirectional), I don't
see any FE (none).
On the other hand, if I use bidirectional traffic of large
packets I see the FE and packet drops (actually, I start seeing them
on both side) :
--------------------------------
2.4.20-rc1 (was 2.4.46) :
0: uart:16550A port:3F8 irq:4 baud:9600 tx:1440518 rx:7466705 fe:303 RTS|DTR
2.4.20-pre8 :
0: uart:16550A port:3F8 irq:4 baud:9600 tx:16502356 rx:2486282 fe:8 RTS|DTR
--------------------------------
(all the 303 of them appeared during the few bidirectional tests)
(as my perf numbers for directional traffic are up from 2.5.X,
I guess there is less spacket drop than with 2.5.X).
Lastly, directional traffic of small packet doesn't produce any FE.
So, clearly it depend on the traffic pattern. And the move
from 2.4.X to 2.5.X bring FE/drop in case where there was none,
i.e. 2.5.X make it worse.
And I'm wondering if it's just a case a crappy hardware, but
there seems to be more.
From your description of what FE is, I don't understand how
changing the kernel/driver/traffic pattern would make this number
change. Puzzling...
Good luck...
Jean
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-11-08 2:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-11-07 22:47 Jean Tourrilhes
2002-11-08 0:18 ` Russell King
2002-11-08 0:41 ` Jean Tourrilhes
2002-11-08 0:49 ` Russell King
2002-11-08 0:55 ` Jean Tourrilhes
2002-11-08 2:40 ` Jean Tourrilhes [this message]
2002-11-08 22:34 ` Martin Diehl
2002-11-08 23:25 ` Russell King
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20021108024058.GA1266@bougret.hpl.hp.com \
--to=jt@bougret.hpl.hp.com \
--cc=jt@hpl.hp.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lists@mdiehl.de \
--cc=rmk@arm.linux.org.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®