nvnet performancde sucks

ascompltd · 07-14-03, 12:13 PM

Can anybody shed any light on this problem for me

I have an Epox 8RDA+ motherboard, FX5600 Graphic and 1GB Ram on my new board I thought I had researched this system before I purchased it but I have a real problem with network performance.

My Kernel is 2.4.22pre2-gss and have the nforce support built into kernel my nick comes up with a dhcp assigned IP but performance is woefull from time to time

like now for example I have had to resort to (and appologies for swearing hear) my windowz box to post this message.

I have tried both 0261 and 0256 versions of the nvnet driver with no improvenment also acpi=noacpi amd acpi=off still no joy

mariuz · 07-14-03, 03:14 PM

there is something like hdparm to test
the network card performance maybe ?!
If you run the with the stock kernel the performance is good ? Give it a try and disable
the dhcp , sometimes the performance is lower than with static ip .
ps : I run with kernel 2.4.20 and it works good (installed binaries not from source...)

Max3D · 07-14-03, 07:50 PM

Performance seems good here for data transfer speeds, same as within XP, one thing that annoys me is the time it takes for nvnet.o to negotiate with cable modem on bootup of kernel is rediculous, anywhere between 30 secs and 1 min it hangs there waiting (in XP its real quick to get IP and start working), tried all the nvnet.o combination of options (optimization, link speed, duplex) and switched between dhcp-client and pump client to no avail, anyone else have this issue?

These work great and negotiate quickly:
- Netgear FA311 (natsemi.o)
- Netgear FA310 (tulip.o)

why can't your drivers do the same?
Common nvidia, fix this!

bahamot · 07-15-03, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Max3D
Performance seems good here for data transfer speeds, same as within XP, one thing that annoys me is the time it takes for nvnet.o to negotiate with cable modem on bootup of kernel is rediculous, anywhere between 30 secs and 1 min it hangs there waiting (in XP its real quick to get IP and start working), tried all the nvnet.o combination of options (optimization, link speed, duplex) and switched between dhcp-client and pump client to no avail, anyone else have this issue? ...

nvnet works fine, but the audio driver in linux is lame

spurious-noise · 07-15-03, 10:43 PM

nvnet performance here is absulutley shocking

Small files take around 1 second each to transfer and it basically stops the box when doing so. The symptoms resemble excessive interrupts.

we are running Asus A7N266-VM mainboards with XP1800+ and 512Mb RAM
and revision 1.0.0261 nforce drivers

any tips?

erwos · 07-17-03, 12:44 PM

I haven't used nvnet extensively, but I've never had any performance problems with file transfers. It does have an issue with insertion, but it's only a few seconds.

The driver has issues, but it ain't so bad.

-Erwos

betel · 07-20-03, 11:24 AM

Had some fun with this myself this past weekend. But, just about got it figured out now:

The performance was dire initially, but I added the module option "optimization=1" which bizarrely optimized for CPU according to the code. But, this got me up from 12k/sec to at least 5MB/s.

I also had what can only be described as crazy IRQ issues. All three of the devices that I would use most (ethernet, dxr3 and DVB card) were sharing the same IRQ. This manifested itself as nasty picture breakup when the network was in use (useful!). Hard coding the IRQs for the PCI slots in the bios seemed to sort it out.

Oh, this is 2.4.21-ac4 on an A7N266-VM.

cheers

sessland · 08-08-03, 11:17 PM

I am having the exact same issues. The whole system is choppy as hell when the NIC is being used. Reminds me of when I used to try to multi-task my 486DX33 on Win 3.1

Are people seeing the same problems from the RPM as well as the source? It shouldn't make a difference, but you never know.

07-14-03, 12:13 PM	#1
ascompltd Registered User Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 1	nvnet performancde sucks Can anybody shed any light on this problem for me I have an Epox 8RDA+ motherboard, FX5600 Graphic and 1GB Ram on my new board I thought I had researched this system before I purchased it but I have a real problem with network performance. My Kernel is 2.4.22pre2-gss and have the nforce support built into kernel my nick comes up with a dhcp assigned IP but performance is woefull from time to time like now for example I have had to resort to (and appologies for swearing hear) my windowz box to post this message. I have tried both 0261 and 0256 versions of the nvnet driver with no improvenment also acpi=noacpi amd acpi=off still no joy

07-14-03, 03:14 PM	#2
mariuz Albino penguin Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Transylvania Posts: 114	I don't know there is something like hdparm to test the network card performance maybe ?! If you run the with the stock kernel the performance is good ? Give it a try and disable the dhcp , sometimes the performance is lower than with static ip . ps : I run with kernel 2.4.20 and it works good (installed binaries not from source...) __________________ http://www.firebirdsql.org

07-14-03, 07:50 PM	#3
Max3D Quadro2 Pro Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 28	Performance seems good here for data transfer speeds, same as within XP, one thing that annoys me is the time it takes for nvnet.o to negotiate with cable modem on bootup of kernel is rediculous, anywhere between 30 secs and 1 min it hangs there waiting (in XP its real quick to get IP and start working), tried all the nvnet.o combination of options (optimization, link speed, duplex) and switched between dhcp-client and pump client to no avail, anyone else have this issue? These work great and negotiate quickly: - Netgear FA311 (natsemi.o) - Netgear FA310 (tulip.o) why can't your drivers do the same? Common nvidia, fix this! Last edited by Max3D; 07-14-03 at 08:02 PM.

07-15-03, 10:43 PM	#5
spurious-noise Registered User Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Canberra, Australia Posts: 1	nvnet performance here is absulutley shocking Small files take around 1 second each to transfer and it basically stops the box when doing so. The symptoms resemble excessive interrupts. we are running Asus A7N266-VM mainboards with XP1800+ and 512Mb RAM and revision 1.0.0261 nforce drivers any tips? __________________ win32 Hiku Your file is quite large It might be very useful but now it is gone ...

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
NVNET device not present, delaying activation	robothefan	NVIDIA Linux	4	10-01-02 09:43 PM
Lightning sucks!!!!!!!!	exar	General Hardware	3	08-23-02 07:50 PM
nvnet drivers in kernel, not module?	xaphod	NVIDIA Linux	2	08-10-02 12:03 PM
Problem with Ethernet (nvnet) driver for RH 7.3	bernz	NVIDIA Linux	4	08-05-02 10:18 AM
Custom Watercooling Sucks Why?	DoinkyBottoms	CPUs, Motherboards And Memory	8	08-01-02 02:42 PM

07-17-03, 12:44 PM	#6
erwos Registered User Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 78	I haven't used nvnet extensively, but I've never had any performance problems with file transfers. It does have an issue with insertion, but it's only a few seconds. The driver has issues, but it ain't so bad. -Erwos

07-20-03, 11:24 AM	#7
betel Registered User Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 1	Had some fun with this myself this past weekend. But, just about got it figured out now: The performance was dire initially, but I added the module option "optimization=1" which bizarrely optimized for CPU according to the code. But, this got me up from 12k/sec to at least 5MB/s. I also had what can only be described as crazy IRQ issues. All three of the devices that I would use most (ethernet, dxr3 and DVB card) were sharing the same IRQ. This manifested itself as nasty picture breakup when the network was in use (useful!). Hard coding the IRQs for the PCI slots in the bios seemed to sort it out. Oh, this is 2.4.21-ac4 on an A7N266-VM. cheers

08-08-03, 11:17 PM	#8
sessland Registered User Join Date: Aug 2003 Posts: 5	I am having the exact same issues. The whole system is choppy as hell when the NIC is being used. Reminds me of when I used to try to multi-task my 486DX33 on Win 3.1 Are people seeing the same problems from the RPM as well as the source? It shouldn't make a difference, but you never know.