Re: AMD64 much slower than i386 on FreeBSD 5.4-pre
From: Boris Spirialitious (hardcodeharry_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 03/25/05
- Previous message: stheg olloydson: "Re: cannot boot 5.3 after power failure - major bug?"
- Next in thread: Boris Spirialitious: "RE: AMD64 much slower than i386 on FreeBSD 5.4-pre"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2005 20:29:12 -0800 (PST) To: em1897@aol.com, questions@freebsd.org
I think you may be right. I try Broadcom gigE card
with same results. Very slow for amd64 build. With
same hardware, very good results with 4.9/i386,
not too bad with 5.4-pre/i386, and very, very
poor with 5.4-pre/amd64.
Boris
--- em1897@aol.com wrote:
> I think the point of a list is so that someone can
> say "oh yes, I had
> problems with the
> em driver in amd64 also; try card X." But instead
> you get a lot of
> people with no real
> idea trying to explain away the problem, as if there
> is no chance that
> the amd64
> implementant just plain sucks wind. If someone who
> actually has an
> amd64 build
> could post some usage/load numbers, or someone who
> did some testing
> with
> various hardware, that might be useful. So far what
> we have is like a
> bunch of
> Mothers trying to defend their children without
> having any viable
> answers or
> evidence than amd64 is any good at all. Only a
> people who say
> nonsensical
> things like "my opteron blows away any P4", like a
> kid bragging about
> his
> mustang or something.
>
> The em driver has a standard hold-off of 8000
> ints/second, so thats not
> likely
> the problem. Its likely to be the same in both i386
> and amd64, so its a
> control.
>
>
> <snippage>
> So the whole interrupt/process switching mechanism
> runs like crap with
> the amd64 build? Since I don't have a amd64 system,
> and you might hav
> access to atleast 1, how about getting a little info
> on the irqs? Look
> at systat -vmstat or vmstat -i under load? aybe
> report it back? I
> wonder if the irq rates are changing, or irqs are
> taking longer to
> service. Either there is a problem. Ofcourse some
> hardware info would
> be nice, chipset and cpu? Maybe you script vmstat -i
> for a log, and use
> netperf too?
> I like Nick's followup. I would guese Boris may have
> a problem with
> proper hardware support. I can't really said it is
> bad hardware if
> speeds are the same, just high load(right?). Maybe
> the driver he is
> using is not good for 64bit as it is for 32bit?
>
> I think if Boris studies the thread I like to below
> he will be alright.
>
> Check this out:
>
http://www.atm.tut.fi/list-archive/freebsd-stable/thrd66.html
>
http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200502171636.10361.drice
>
> Inparticular:
>
http://www.atm.tut.fi/list-archive/freebsd-stable/msg19651.html
>
http://www.atm.tut.fi/list-archive/freebsd-stable/msg19679.html
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
>
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
>
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to
> "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Make Yahoo! your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"
- Previous message: stheg olloydson: "Re: cannot boot 5.3 after power failure - major bug?"
- Next in thread: Boris Spirialitious: "RE: AMD64 much slower than i386 on FreeBSD 5.4-pre"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
|
