On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, jamal wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, Martin Josefsson wrote:
> > The recieving end was a 2 x pIII 600 server with a D-Link DFE570-TX NIC
> > (quad tulip) running 2.4.8-ac12 + tulip-ss010402-polling driver.
> > The sending machine was my workstation here, a pIII 700 with eepro100 NIC
> > running 2.4.9-ac5. This machine is attached to eth1 on the server via a
> > crossover cable.
> > The reciever has a few iptables modules loaded, ip_conntrack was one of
> > them. (the sender doesn't have any iptables modules loaded)
> Its been proven that contrack does slow down things ..
Yes I know that's why I mentioned it.
> [Good test results deleted]
> Could you repeat the tests with NAPI? The interesting bit is when you
> start sending on the other ethernet ports at really high rates
> output of cat /proc/interupts and /proc/net/softnet_stat also
> /proc/net/drivers/* output
I'll see if I can rerun the tests again today with the NAPI-patched kernel
I have here (2.4.9-ac18 + 2.4.10-poll.pat + tulip-NAPI-ss011004
(mislabeled as 011010 on robur.slu.se)
I might have to wait with these tests untill tomorrow, boring school work
that needs to be done :(
Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you