1. International LinuxCNC Users
  3. Deutsch
  5. Neue Hardware und schlechter Latency Test

Neue Hardware und schlechter Latency Test

More
31 Jul 2023 11:55 #276621 by WKS-3D
Replied by WKS-3D on topic Neue Hardware und schlechter Latency Test
Everything is disabled in the BIOS, no energy management, no Hyper Threading.
The temperatures are good, but there is still a lot of room for improvement.
There are always only peaks in an interval of about 1 minute that I see when I reset the latency test.
I still have an idea what I can try.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
31 Jul 2023 12:22 - 31 Jul 2023 12:22 #276622 by WKS-3D
Replied by WKS-3D on topic Neue Hardware und schlechter Latency Test
My idea was to pull out the USB to LAN adapter and then run the test again. At first it looked good, but after 15 minutes the value jumped up again, too high.

I have to wait for the new hardware.

No idea what else I can do. I don't feel like it anymore either.
Last edit: 31 Jul 2023 12:22 by WKS-3D.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Aug 2023 16:16 - 04 Aug 2023 16:19 #276903 by WKS-3D
Replied by WKS-3D on topic Neue Hardware und schlechter Latency Test
So, new hardware arrived and I reinstalled everything.
Here are the current latency values: (During the test, YouTube videos were playing and I was surfing the net.)
 

and the PING results:
PING 10.10.10.10 (10.10.10.10) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.277 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.280 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.280 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.282 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.280 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=0.279 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=0.260 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=0.282 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=0.282 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=0.280 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=11 ttl=64 time=0.278 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=12 ttl=64 time=0.288 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=13 ttl=64 time=0.279 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=14 ttl=64 time=0.284 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=15 ttl=64 time=0.282 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=16 ttl=64 time=0.283 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=17 ttl=64 time=0.279 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=18 ttl=64 time=0.279 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=19 ttl=64 time=0.285 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=20 ttl=64 time=0.278 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=21 ttl=64 time=0.279 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=22 ttl=64 time=0.280 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=23 ttl=64 time=0.280 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=24 ttl=64 time=0.280 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=25 ttl=64 time=0.277 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=26 ttl=64 time=0.278 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=27 ttl=64 time=0.277 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=28 ttl=64 time=0.276 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=29 ttl=64 time=0.282 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=30 ttl=64 time=0.275 ms
64 bytes from 10.10.10.10: icmp_seq=31 ttl=64 time=0.303 ms
^C
--- 10.10.10.10 ping statistics ---
31 packets transmitted, 31 received, 0% packet loss, time 30678ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.260/0.280/0.303/0.006 ms
[/code]


Is this ok or can it be better?
I have worked through the instructions.
 
Attachments:
Last edit: 04 Aug 2023 16:19 by WKS-3D.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Aug 2023 16:35 #276910 by PCW
Replied by PCW on topic Neue Hardware und schlechter Latency Test
If the PC has a Intel MAC, you should disable IRQ coalescing
as described in the hm2_eth manual page

(and verify that its off with ethtool -c eno1)

replace eno1 with your ethernet device name if its different

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Aug 2023 16:40 #276912 by tommylight
Replied by tommylight on topic Neue Hardware und schlechter Latency Test
It looks fine.
Did you test without isolcpu ? I really hate knee-capping hardware without a really good reason, so i never used it.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Aug 2023 17:02 - 04 Aug 2023 17:05 #276914 by WKS-3D
Replied by WKS-3D on topic Neue Hardware und schlechter Latency Test

If the PC has a Intel MAC, you should disable IRQ coalescing
as described in the hm2_eth manual page

(and verify that its off with ethtool -c eno1)

replace eno1 with your ethernet device name if its different


Is that what you mean?
Coalesce parameters for enp4s0:
Adaptive RX: n/a  TX: n/a
stats-block-usecs: n/a
sample-interval: n/a
pkt-rate-low: n/a
pkt-rate-high: n/a

rx-usecs: 0
rx-frames: n/a
rx-usecs-irq: n/a
rx-frames-irq: n/a

tx-usecs: n/a
tx-frames: n/a
tx-usecs-irq: n/a
tx-frames-irq: n/a

rx-usecs-low: n/a
rx-frame-low: n/a
tx-usecs-low: n/a
tx-frame-low: n/a

rx-usecs-high: n/a
rx-frame-high: n/a
tx-usecs-high: n/a
tx-frame-high: n/a

CQE mode RX: n/a  TX: n/a
Last edit: 04 Aug 2023 17:05 by WKS-3D.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Aug 2023 17:04 #276915 by WKS-3D
Replied by WKS-3D on topic Neue Hardware und schlechter Latency Test

It looks fine.
Did you test without isolcpu ? I really hate knee-capping hardware without a really good reason, so i never used it.
 

No I have not. Should I do that?

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Aug 2023 17:24 #276916 by PCW
Replied by PCW on topic Neue Hardware und schlechter Latency Test
OK so not Intel Ethernet hardware

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Aug 2023 17:28 #276917 by WKS-3D
Replied by WKS-3D on topic Neue Hardware und schlechter Latency Test

OK so not Intel Ethernet hardware


Yes, the network card where the mesa card is attached is an Intel card. The onboard one for the home network is a Realtek one.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

More
04 Aug 2023 17:36 #276918 by WKS-3D
Replied by WKS-3D on topic Neue Hardware und schlechter Latency Test

OK so not Intel Ethernet hardware
 

driver: e1000e
version: 6.1.0-10-rt-amd64
firmware-version: 1.8-0
expansion-rom-version:
bus-info: 0000:04:00.0
supports-statistics: yes
supports-test: yes
supports-eeprom-access: yes
supports-register-dump: yes
supports-priv-flags: yes

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  1. International LinuxCNC Users
  3. Deutsch
  5. Neue Hardware und schlechter Latency Test
Time to create page: 0.231 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum