From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 10:09:48 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 10:09:47 -0500 Received: from holly.csn.ul.ie ([136.201.105.4]:30086 "EHLO holly.csn.ul.ie") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 25 Mar 2003 10:09:46 -0500 Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2003 15:20:51 +0000 (GMT) From: Mel Gorman X-X-Sender: mel@skynet To: Dave Hansen Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: Poor performance with pcnet32 on SMP In-Reply-To: <3E7B5B41.2070308@us.ibm.com> Message-ID: References: <3E7B5B41.2070308@us.ibm.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 21 Mar 2003, Dave Hansen wrote: > I have the same kind of machine. I've seen the same problems, but > they're intermittent; I haven't been able to really discern a pattern. Neither can I. I did not that sometimes between subsequent boots, I could get either 300B/s or 7kB/s for no apparent reason. > I have the feeling that part of the problem may be with the machine on > the other side of the connection. > I tried a few different machines but they are all using a 2.4.x kernel of some description. It still is a lot more reliable if SMP is disabled. > Yeah, kirq was causing that and it _was_ broken for a bit. It should > have been fixed by 2.5.64, though. > I'm not sure and I don't have the expertise to track down the problem. After a session of Devils Guide To Debugging[1], I could not find any pattern that determined performance. I tried loading the module full duplex at 100mb (it still resolves to 10mb at half-duplex) and various combinations of smp_affinity but it still is very poor. Curiously enough, trying to load it at 100mb and full_duplex makes it perform more predictably. It's still bad (3 to 7 kB/s), but bad at a consistant level. I suspect this observation exists purely inside my own head though. I tried turning off ACPI but it made no difference. I did note that I get decent performance to a 2.4 UP box that is on the same subnet as me. I am not sure if it is relevant but the computer I am getting really bad performance with is on another subnet behind a firewall even though it is on the same LAN. I am going to leave it for the moment anyway as I am getting nowhere with the problem. Thanks for your time and if there is any other suggestions, I'd be happy to try them out. Mel [1] Change things at random until something works