similar to: [Bridge] Bridge performance problem

I was running a frame loss test the other day against an rhel4 smp kernel and a non-smp kernel. I noticed I was getting better numbers when I ran the non-smp kernel. I was surprised by that. Anyone have any insight into this? I am running this with e1000 dirvers. I also ran a test where I ran the smp kernel with hyper threading turned on and off. There, the frame loss numbers were worse when

First,sorry my poor english~ Here is this test: Virtualization performance comparison test Test environment Physical machine: Cpu 8-core 8G memory HDD: 147G xen virtual machine: cpu 2 core 4G memory 30G hard drive wmware virtual machine: cpu 2 core 4G memory 30G hard drive Optical disk array (san) Size: 7.7T Speed: 6G/sec Testing and structural I / 0 performance test Test methods Test

I'm debugging a strange problem of noncommunication between two devices. The test configuration is also strange, and involves loops. Things magically start working when I run tcpdump to put the bridge interface into promiscuous mode. I also noticed this in the output of brctl showmacs. port no mac addr is local? ageing timer 1 00:40:72:04:2d:ea no

In 2.4, I relied on the skb->stamp to contain the timestamp of when the packet entered the bridge. In 2.6, I don't seem to be seeing this behaviour. Is this correct? If so, what is the best place for me to grab the timestamp of the packet entering the bridge. TIA. --joubert

I would like to set up an ACL for an ethernet port using ebtables rules, and if a security violation occurs, to physically disable the port (i.e. whatever "ifconfig down" does). I did not see such a feature in the ebtables man page. Does this exist anywhere, or do I have to create a new extension for it? -- Dan Eble <dane@aiinet.com> _____ . | _

Hello I''ve setuped a QOS bridge under debian 3.1 using 2.6.18.3 kernel + iptables 1.3.6 I''ve patched the kernel an Iptables with esfq+layer7 without problems. This simple script doesn''t log nothing ... And I''m sure to have eMule traffic (I''ve checked with tcpdump ) If I remove " -m layer7 --l7proto edonkey \" line I can see

Hi all: This series is an update version of multiqueue virtio-net driver based on Krishna Kumar's work to let virtio-net use multiple rx/tx queues to do the packets reception and transmission. Please review and comments. Changes from v5: - Align the implementation with the RFC spec update v4 - Switch the mode between single mode and multiqueue mode without reset - Remove the 256 limitation

Hi all: This series is an update version of multiqueue virtio-net driver based on Krishna Kumar's work to let virtio-net use multiple rx/tx queues to do the packets reception and transmission. Please review and comments. Changes from v5: - Align the implementation with the RFC spec update v4 - Switch the mode between single mode and multiqueue mode without reset - Remove the 256 limitation

I'm recording TCP network throughput performance between Dom0 IP stack and all my guest domains (currently 6 running simultaneously). All guests are running simultaneously, but I only ever transmit between Dom0 and one of the DomUs while the other five are idle. When running a netperf TCP_STREAM test (netperf on Dom0, netserver on DomU) I record the following performance numbers, CPU % as

I have 3 machines, T60 thinkpad with e1000 NIC Dell PowerEdge 2950 with bnx2 NIC HP DL360 G4P with tg3 NIC All running xen 3.03 / 2.6.16.29-xen I have a netbootable image with 2.6.16.29-xenU. This image when it boots creates a vlan eth0.4002, and then tries to communicate on that interface to a central server. On the machines with e1000 an bnx2 NICs, this works fine. On the

Ahoy, I've encountered some confusing semantics with using PACKET(7) sockets on bridge-enslaved interfaces. Specifically, if my socket accepts all types of frame (bind() to ETH_P_ALL) then it gets all packets; but if it accepts any specific type (e.g. ETH_P_IP), then it receives no packets at all. That is how it's coded in net/core/dev.c's netif_receive_skb(). First ETH_P_ALL

Hi, I've set up a bridge using the 2.6.11.6 kernel. The machine is running Debian testing with three NICs in it. eth0 is a standard 100Mb Intel NIC, eth1 and eth2 are both Intel gigabit cards using the e1000 driver. I tested everything at 100Mb and it worked fine. I moved the machine into production, eth1 plugging into a dumb 100Mb D-link switch, eth2 plugging into a shiney new Cisco

> -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Hemminger [mailto:shemminger@osdl.org] > Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2004 11:41 AM > > Could you work with 2.6 rather than 2.4? I'm truly sorry, but I get paid to work with 2.4. My employer understands the value of giving back to the open source community, and this is what we have at the moment. Someone else is going to have to

I have a bridge that has gigabit interfaces. The machine in question has the fun job of being a Bridge, Firewall and SMB server. Both of the Gigabit interfaces are connected to workstations directly via Xover cable (well MDI-X to be exact). My question is, if I enable jumbo frames on the gigabit interfaces will that make any difference in overall transfer rate of the bridge? I was thinking it

Hi everyone. I am running Samba 3.2.0-22.1 (as packaged by OpenSUSE in 11.0) on a storage server connected to multiple windows based clients over a gigabit ethernet link. The server is a quad core Intel CPU and is equipped with an Intel e1000 based gigabit ethernet controller and plugged into a common gigabit ethernet switch with the windows clients. I am seeing performance issues on transfers

Hi, I noticed that network connection of one of my boxes got significantly slow just after upgrading it to 8.0R. The box has an em0 (82547EI) and worked fine with 7.2R. The symptoms are: - A ping to a host on the same LAN takes 990ms RTT, it reduces gradually to around 1ms, and then it returns to around 1s. The rate was about 2ms/ping. - The response is quite slow, but no packet

Hi, If I add an entire disk to a new pool by doing "zpool create", is this reversible? I.e. if there was data on that disk (e.g. it was the sole disk in a zpool in another system) can I get this back or is zpool create destructive? Joubert This message posted from opensolaris.org

Hello everybody, I''ve finished with pci export from DomU to Dom0 (Debian Etch) but now i have a new problem, and a big one. My ethernet card is dropping packets but after some time (i can''t tell how) It can work for a day (not in production so not hard tested) and then all packets are dropped. Look at the ifconfig output : eth0      Link encap:Ethernet  HWaddr

To those who will eb able to assist, Platform: On Ubuntu 12.04 I have used the latest Git version. I have installed isc-dhcp-server and bind9 from the plain apt repositories and have configured DHCP and BIND9 so that DHCP can update DNS entries via the hmac-md5 as so: key rndc-key { algorithm hmac-md5; secret "XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX==";} allow unknown-clients; use-host-decl-names on;

Hello, Please CC replies I'm not subscribed. Performance with samba and only samba degrades terribly when we use the bonding driver to aggregate two ethernet cards. Instead of a steady file copy it seems to go in spurts. If I pull out one of the network cables (doesn't matter which) performance resumes to full speed. I can pull the cable in the middle of a transfer and it will go