Nate, good day! Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 12:42:32PM -0700, Nate Lawson wrote: > > I see no difference between the -CURRENT from today and from 30th > > March (I see that your commit was made at 26th of March, but I am > > not sure that mu current was updated after it for the -CURRENT > > compiled at 30th of March). > > > > The bad news are that the ALTQ behaves wrong: when the CPU frequency > > is changed the bandwidth changes too. Either I am doing something > > wrong, or your commit should be polished a bit. > > First, add a printf at line 915 (end of function tsc_freq_changed() in > sys/contrib/altq/altq/altq_subr.c): > printf("machclk_freq now %d\n", machclk_freq); ^^ Should be %lu, I believe? > Does it trigger when you change the cpu freq? Is the number printent > correct (i.e. 400 million for 400 Mhz)? Yes, the numbers are perfectly correct. I will try to redo the tests on Monday (when I will be able to use the LAN link) and will watch for this debug information. Any other recommendations are, of course, welcome. > > First two logs, ifstat.bw3Kb.old.wan.log and ifstat.bw3Kb.new.wan.log > > do show the WAN results. The 100 Kbps corresponds to 400 MHz, 200 > > Kbps -- to 800 MHz, 410 Kbps -- to 1600 MHz and 560 Kbps -- to 2200 > > MHz CPU speed. I thought that I was bounded by the WAN link here. > > What was the CPU speed on bootup? 2200 MHz. -- EygeneReceived on Fri Apr 13 2007 - 18:42:49 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:39:08 UTC