Re: call for testers: altq in current

Nate,

Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 01:56:13PM -0700, Nate Lawson wrote:
> > 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.
> 
> Ok, that is good to know the code is running and the freq values are
> correct.  Can you verify through some other cpu benchmark test that the
> freq actually did change to the value printed?

Will try, but it is changing to 2200 MHz while I am doing the
CPU-intensive tasks (compilation of something big) and the debug
printf's are telling about 2200 MHz as well. Not so good benchmark,
but at least something.

> Also, make sure you're not using the TSC timecounter.  sysctl
> kern.timecounter

I am just using the defaults for the -CURRENT. Can not verify
them now -- my -CURRENT is crashing with the modem link, so
I am either writing mails or doing the tests, sorry.

> >>> 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.
> 
> I don't understand those values.  Didn't you setup a constant 3 Kb/sec
> link?  so why would you be getting even 100 Kbps at 400 Mhz?

Yep, that was the constant 3Kbps. I do not understand the measured
values too.

> On the new code but without loading cpufreq and leaving the freq at 2200
> Mhz, do you get the right numbers?  Are they constant?

Monday will reveal the things. Will post an update.

Thank you!
-- 
Eygene