From: Bruce Allen <ballen@gravity.phys.uwm.edu>
To: David Acker <dacker@roinet.com>
Cc: Bill Fink <billfink@mindspring.com>,
SANGTAE HA <sangtae.ha@gmail.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: e1000 full-duplex TCP performance well below wire speed
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:57:40 -0600 (CST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0801310955040.10967@trinity.phys.uwm.edu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47A1E026.2070805@roinet.com>
Hi David,
> Could this be an issue with pause frames? At a previous job I remember
> having issues with a similar configuration using two broadcom sb1250 3
> gigE port devices. If I ran bidirectional tests on a single pair of
> ports connected via cross over, it was slower than when I gave each
> direction its own pair of ports. The problem turned out to be that
> pause frame generation and handling was not configured correctly.
We had PAUSE frames turned off for our testing. The idea is to let TCP
do the flow and congestion control.
The problem with PAUSE+TCP is that it can cause head-of-line blocking,
where a single oversubscribed output port on a switch can PAUSE a large
number of flows on other paths.
Cheers,
Bruce
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-31 15:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-30 9:51 Bruce Allen
2008-01-30 13:18 ` Andi Kleen
2008-01-30 13:38 ` Bruce Allen
2008-01-30 14:08 ` David Miller
2008-01-30 13:53 ` David Miller
2008-01-30 14:01 ` Bruce Allen
2008-01-30 16:21 ` Stephen Hemminger
2008-01-30 22:25 ` Bruce Allen
2008-01-30 22:33 ` Stephen Hemminger
2008-01-30 23:23 ` Bruce Allen
2008-01-31 0:17 ` SANGTAE HA
2008-01-31 8:52 ` Bruce Allen
2008-01-31 11:45 ` Bill Fink
2008-01-31 14:50 ` David Acker
2008-01-31 15:57 ` Bruce Allen [this message]
2008-01-31 15:54 ` Bruce Allen
2008-01-31 17:36 ` Bill Fink
2008-01-31 19:37 ` Bruce Allen
2008-01-31 18:26 ` Brandeburg, Jesse
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=Pine.LNX.4.63.0801310955040.10967@trinity.phys.uwm.edu \
--to=ballen@gravity.phys.uwm.edu \
--cc=billfink@mindspring.com \
--cc=dacker@roinet.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sangtae.ha@gmail.com \
--cc=shemminger@linux-foundation.org \
/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®