No nothing showed in the logs. And I don't understand why such a
performance difference between routing and bridging.


Marco Peereboom wrote:
quoted text
> Possibly interrupt issues.  Where them dmesg'?
> 
> On Tue, May 15, 2007 at 07:04:47PM +0200, Renaud Allard wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I just had the opportunity to test some Fluke network equipment, notably
>> one which is able to throughput test gigabit networks.
>>
>> I installed a Nexcom NSA1086 with OpenBSD 4.1-stable and did some tests.
>> The NSA1086 units are equipped with a Pentium IV 3.2Ghz (hyperthreading
>> disabled), and 1Gb ram. They have 4 sk gigabit interfaces, and 4 msk
>> gigabit interfaces. Here are the tests:
>>
>> **********
>> ifconfig sk0 up
>> ifconfig sk1 up
>> ifconfig bridge0 create
>> ifconfig bridge0 up
>> brconfig bridge0 add sk0
>> brconfig bridge0 add sk1
>> sysctl kern.maxclusters=256000
>>
>> Then I connected the fluke analyzers to both sk ports. connections were
>> correctly seen at 1000 base T full Duplex. then I started a throughput
>> test on 1Gbps, and I was extremely surprised to see how performance was
>> very poor. The throughput was only about 77Mbps.
>>
>> ***************
>>
>> Seeing that I decided to try on msk interfaces and got about the same
>> "performance".
>>
>> ***************
>>
>> Then I configured routing between two interfaces.
>> ifconfig sk2 inet 192.168.0.1 255.255.255.0
>> ifconfig sk3 inet 192.168.1.1 255.255.255.0
>> sysctl net.inet.ip.forwarding=1
>> sysctl kern.maxclusters=256000
>>
>> I did the throughput test, and got about 500Mbps both on sk and msk,
>> with the CPU keeping quiet.
>>
>> **************
>>
>> So the weak performance doesn't seem related to the bus, the CPU, or the
>> sk/msk drivers. Has someone an explanation on why I get this kind of
>> behavior?