Message-ID: <422510BA.1010305@ev-en.org>
Date: Wed, 02 Mar 2005 01:02:50 +0000
From: Baruch Even <baruch@ev-en.org>
User-Agent: Debian Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20050116)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Paul Dickson <dickson@permanentmail.com>
Cc: linux-os@analogic.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Network speed Linux-2.6.10
References: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0503011426180.578@chaos.analogic.com> <20050301175143.04cbbe64.dickson@permanentmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20050301175143.04cbbe64.dickson@permanentmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1277
Lines: 30

Paul Dickson wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Mar 2005 14:29:24 -0500 (EST), linux-os wrote:
>>Intel NIC e100 device driver. Two identical machines.
>>Private network, no other devices. Connected using a Netgear switch.
>>Test data is the same thing sent from memory on one machine
>>to a discard server on another, using TCP/IP SOCK_STREAM.
>>
>>If I set both machines to auto-negotiation OFF and half duplex,
>>I get about 9 to 9.5 megabytes/second across the private wire
>>network.
>>
>>If I set one machine to full duplex and the other to half-duplex
>>I get 10 to 11 megabytes/second transfer across the network,
>>regardless of direction.
>>
>>If I set both machines to auto-negotiation OFF and full duplex,
>>I get 300 to 400 kilobytes/second regardless of the direction.
> 
> Might this be related to the broken BicTCP implementations in the 2.6.6+
> kernels?  A fix was added around 2.6.11-rc3 or 4.

Unlikely, the problem with BIC would have shown itself only at high 
speeds over long latency links, not over a lan connection.

Baruch
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/