[parisc-linux] C110 builtin nic slow?

[Joel Soete]

Sorry for auto-reply but I just remember that on the c110 the builtin nic
is:
"8. Raven T' Core LAN (802.3) (10) at 0xffd07000 [8/16/6], versions 0x32,

0x0, 0x8a"
ie a Lasi_82596 (as Matthew mentioned in a previous mail).

That you look for that stuff in that code :)

Joel


>-- Original Message --
>From: "Joel Soete" <soete.joel@tiscali.be>
>To: "Grant Grundler" <grundler@parisc-linux.org>
>Cc: "parisc-linux" <parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org>
>Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:10:46 +0100
>Subject: Re: [parisc-linux] C110 builtin nic slow?
>
>
>Hello Grant,

> netperf home is netperf.org.

Yes I check and the sources in debian (non-free tree) are the last one alailable
near netperf.org.

> It does run/build on parisc. I've used it before.

Yes, I check it at the office on a b180 :) (
>pkg-buildpackage after
an apt-get source netperf; i don't see why it is not pre-build, well doesn't
matter)

>Note that with B180, I can only get about 1MB/s throughput max.
The same here at the office.

>With C3000 I get about 5 or 6 MB/s 100BT
>link.
What's up, if you connect it via a 10BT hub (but don't reboot and don't
restart or reset the interface). That should be what hapen on my pc box
(but I couldn't verify).

>Your network performance numbers are pretty far off from that but
>th
>re might be other factors involved.

Well trying to help to fix fdisk in 2.6, I don't have time to install netperf
on my C110, sorry.
Any way, a big part of the problem should come from the bad auto-configuration:
As explained before, I start up f
>rst my pc (to get a minicom 'console').
As it is setup with auto-negociation and the c110 is not yet pw up, the
nic should be set at 100/full-duplex. Then when I boot the c110, the nic
is setup with the best of its availability: 10/half-duplex.

T
>at seems to be confirm when I launch '/etc/init.d/networking stop and
latter start (restart don't seems to have same effect but again I couldn't
verify yet) on the pc,then I can log peack of 350k/s (that is already better
but that should be the limi
> of the adsl at this moment).
Another limits seems then to come from squid's caching which drop down flow
to about 100K/s.

So I still have to test ft without squid on the pc, with midle and big size
file, with get and put with various protocol fr
>m the two platform to confirm
this hypothesis (obvioulsy another way would be to use a 100bt router or
switch, but I couldn't get any one, and it would need to much time for me
to learn this
os).


>I expect mem copy routines are saturating the 
>PU and thrashing
>the data cache.  The tulip driver copies the entire buffer from
>where the card DMA'd to the skbuff in order to "bias" the buffer
>by 2 bytes. This avoids un-aligned data access in the "common" TCP case.
>Adding "unaligned access"
>macros to the "common" networking code
>path has been discussed and rejected (again) in the past month or so.
>Linus himself has rejected such proposals in the past to.
>
>If you twiddle the tulip driver to NOT copy all the data for
>packets > 512
>bytes, the kernel will tell you when/where the network
>stack makes unaligned accesses. You can fix those and keep that as
>a local patch. I'd be interested in hearing the netperf (or httperf)
>numbers with such a patch when compared to the current 
>ehavior.
>
Ok I will try it first.

>thanks,
>grant
>
Thanks to your attention,
    Joel





-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tiscali ADSL: 3 mois GRATUITS! L'Internet rapide, c'est pour tout le 
>onde.

http://reg.tiscali.be/default.asp?lg=fr


_______________________________________________
parisc-linux mailing list
parisc-linux@lists.parisc-linux.org
http://lists.parisc-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/parisc-linux



-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tiscali ADSL: 3 mois GRATUITS! L'Internet rapide, c'est pour tout le monde.

http://reg.tiscali.be/default.asp?lg=fr