Re: network cards (drivers) performance.

Re: network cards (drivers) performance.

[Bart Trojanowski]

On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Ofer Fryman wrote:

> Has any one tested the performance of the Tulip or AMD cards (or any other
> network card) on any Linux version, with any CPU and any chip-set?

Wow... that's a pretty broad question!

Yes I have had very good performance with the 'recent' tulip cards:

# lspci | grep DECchip
04:08.0 Ethernet controller: Digital Equipment Corporation DECchip 21142/43 (rev 41)
04:09.0 Ethernet controller: Digital Equipment Corporation DECchip 21142/43 (rev 41)

I have been able to tunnel about 186 Mbits/s on a P3Xeon/866 on any 2.4.{1,3}
kernel with two of the above cards (tulip driver).  Note that this means
full duplex was on and the box was forwarding a total of 186 MBits of data
fron one NIC to another; actually it was 93 in each direction.  Fast
routing (a la CONFIG_NET_FASTROUTE) was _not_ compiled into the kernel.

B.

-- 
	WebSig: http://www.jukie.net/~bart/sig/

network cards (drivers) performance.

[Ofer Fryman]

Has any one tested the performance of the Tulip or AMD cards (or any other
network card) on any Linux version, with any CPU and any chip-set?

RE: network cards (drivers) performance.

[Ofer Fryman]

At what frame size?.

Thanks
Ofer

-----Original Message-----
From: Bart Trojanowski [mailto:bart@jukie.net]
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 4:30 PM
To: Ofer Fryman
Cc: 'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'; 'linux-net@vger.kernel.org'
Subject: Re: network cards (drivers) performance.


On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Ofer Fryman wrote:

> Has any one tested the performance of the Tulip or AMD cards (or any other
> network card) on any Linux version, with any CPU and any chip-set?

Wow... that's a pretty broad question!

Yes I have had very good performance with the 'recent' tulip cards:

# lspci | grep DECchip
04:08.0 Ethernet controller: Digital Equipment Corporation DECchip 21142/43
(rev 41)
04:09.0 Ethernet controller: Digital Equipment Corporation DECchip 21142/43
(rev 41)

I have been able to tunnel about 186 Mbits/s on a P3Xeon/866 on any
2.4.{1,3}
kernel with two of the above cards (tulip driver).  Note that this means
full duplex was on and the box was forwarding a total of 186 MBits of data
fron one NIC to another; actually it was 93 in each direction.  Fast
routing (a la CONFIG_NET_FASTROUTE) was _not_ compiled into the kernel.

B.

-- 
	WebSig: http://www.jukie.net/~bart/sig/

RE: network cards (drivers) performance.

[Bart Trojanowski]

I used 1024 byte IP packet size (+12 bytes of Ethernet header) under 1500
MTU.

On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Ofer Fryman wrote:

> At what frame size?.
>
> Thanks
> Ofer
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bart Trojanowski [mailto:bart@jukie.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2001 4:30 PM
> To: Ofer Fryman
> Cc: 'linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org'; 'linux-net@vger.kernel.org'
> Subject: Re: network cards (drivers) performance.
>
>
> On Tue, 10 Apr 2001, Ofer Fryman wrote:
>
> > Has any one tested the performance of the Tulip or AMD cards (or any other
> > network card) on any Linux version, with any CPU and any chip-set?
>
> Wow... that's a pretty broad question!
>
> Yes I have had very good performance with the 'recent' tulip cards:
>
> # lspci | grep DECchip
> 04:08.0 Ethernet controller: Digital Equipment Corporation DECchip 21142/43
> (rev 41)
> 04:09.0 Ethernet controller: Digital Equipment Corporation DECchip 21142/43
> (rev 41)
>
> I have been able to tunnel about 186 Mbits/s on a P3Xeon/866 on any
> 2.4.{1,3}
> kernel with two of the above cards (tulip driver).  Note that this means
> full duplex was on and the box was forwarding a total of 186 MBits of data
> fron one NIC to another; actually it was 93 in each direction.  Fast
> routing (a la CONFIG_NET_FASTROUTE) was _not_ compiled into the kernel.
>
> B.
>
>

-- 
	WebSig: http://www.jukie.net/~bart/sig/