Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261626AbVDTN6E (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Apr 2005 09:58:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261627AbVDTN6E (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Apr 2005 09:58:04 -0400 Received: from unthought.net ([212.97.129.88]:175 "EHLO unthought.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261626AbVDTN57 (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Apr 2005 09:57:59 -0400 Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 15:57:58 +0200 From: Jakob Oestergaard To: Trond Myklebust Cc: Greg Banks , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: bdflush/rpciod high CPU utilization, profile does not make sense Message-ID: <20050420135758.GS17359@unthought.net> Mail-Followup-To: Jakob Oestergaard , Trond Myklebust , Greg Banks , Linux Kernel Mailing List References: <1113222939.14281.17.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20050411134703.GC13369@unthought.net> <1113230125.9962.7.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20050411144127.GE13369@unthought.net> <1113232905.9962.15.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> <20050411154211.GG13369@unthought.net> <1113267809.1956.242.camel@hole.melbourne.sgi.com> <20050412092843.GB17359@unthought.net> <20050419194515.GP17359@unthought.net> <1113950788.10685.9.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1113950788.10685.9.camel@lade.trondhjem.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1763 Lines: 49 On Tue, Apr 19, 2005 at 06:46:28PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote: > ty den 19.04.2005 Klokka 21:45 (+0200) skreiv Jakob Oestergaard: > > > It mounts a home directory from a 2.6.6 NFS server - the client and > > server are on a hub'ed 100Mbit network. > > > > On the earlier 2.6 client I/O performance was as one would expect on > > hub'ed 100Mbit - meaning, not exactly stellar, but you'd get around 4-5 > > MB/sec and decent interactivity. > > OK, hold it right there... > ... > Also, does that hub support NICs that do autonegotiation? (I'll bet the > answer is "no"). *blush* Ok Trond, you got me there - I don't know why upgrading the client made the problem much more visible though, but the *server* had negotiated full duplex rather than half (the client negotiated half ok). Fixing that on the server side made the client pleasent to work with again. Mom's a happy camper now again ;) Sorry for jumping the gun there... To get back to the original problem; I wonder if (as was discussed) the tg3 driver on my NFS server is dropping packets, causing the 2.6.11 NFS client to misbehave... This didn't make sense to me before (since earlier clients worked well), but having just seen this other case where a broken server setup caused 2.6.11 clients to misbehave (where earlier clients were fine), maybe it could be an explanation... Will try either changing tg3 driver or putting in an e1000 on my NFS server - I will let you know about the status on this when I know more. Thanks all, -- / jakob - 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/