[tor] Re: Migration to 2host? FreeBSD on current host?
- From: Julian Wissmann <julianwissmann@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: torservers@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2010 00:01:54 +0200
Am 22.08.2010 um 23:34 schrieb grarpamp:
>> FreeBSD does that differently. Afaik actually only make sense when you go
>> tickless with the Kernel which FreeBSD hasn't done. So their way of reducing
>> networking load is by polling the card instead of having it send thousands
>> of interrupts. It works with igb and ixgb, I'm not sure about e1000.
>
> Yes, they implemented polling for many NIC's. And toggleable on the
> fly with ifconfig. Hz is adjustable if need be. There are also kernel,
> loader and sysctl bits. And things like interrupt coalescing and
> loadable microcode. All depends on the
> NIC... Check the man pages, driver source/readme's and kernel config.
Yes, but remember, that setting kern.hz affects all cores. What probably also
helps a lot with polling is probably increasing buffer size to 32 or even 64
megs.
I just did double check on the manpaes for ixgb, em and igb. All of those
drivers support polling. The devices mentioned are supported by if_em and
polling is supported.
>
>> the current FreeBSD Stable Release doesn't work with Intel NICs _again_
>
> I can't confirm. Given that Intel is one of the top three or so most
> popular and performant nics, I highly doubt RELENG_8_1_0_RELEASE
> shipped unable to pass packets.
So the FreeBSD team should postpone a code freeze just becaue Jack Vogel isn't
abled to follow the committing rules everyone else follows? After all Intel
will earn a bad reputation for shitty drivers, not necessarily FreeBSD. That
said it sadly iwill freeze with releng_8_1_release. See the mailing lists for
reference. Googling "Jack, did you break em(4) (or lem in this case) again?
:-)" is probably the best starting point for it actually.
>
> Either way, if you cvsup or cvs co the driver to RELENG_8, you
> will get a commit as of 10 days ago, as opposed to the last one 4 months ago.
> And you might still be able to drop in a version from Intel's site too.
I just checked, there's an errata since a few days that fixes it in the 8_1
branch. Backporting from 8-stable also works, pulling the source from intel,
too but imo thats not the way of handling things on production systems.
Other related posts:
