netdev - Re: e1000 full-duplex TCP performance well below wire speed

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 31 Jan 2008 18:27:01 +0100
From:	Carsten Aulbert <carsten.aulbert@....mpg.de>
To:	"Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>
CC:	Bruce Allen <ballen@...vity.phys.uwm.edu>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Henning Fehrmann <henning.fehrmann@....mpg.de>,
	Bruce Allen <bruce.allen@....mpg.de>
Subject: Re: e1000 full-duplex TCP performance well below wire speed

Hi all,

Brandeburg, Jesse wrote:
>>> I would suggest you try TCP_RR with a command line something like
>>> this: netperf -t TCP_RR -H <hostname> -C -c -- -b 4 -r 64K
>> I did that and the results can be found here:
>> https://n0.aei.uni-hannover.de/wiki/index.php/NetworkTest
> 
> seems something went wrong and all you ran was the 1 byte tests, where
> it should have been 64K both directions (request/response).
>  

Yes, shell-quoting got me there. I'll re-run the tests, so please don't 
look at the TCP_RR results too closely. I think I'll be able to run 
maybe one or two more tests today, rest will follow tomorrow.

Thanks for bearing with me

Carsten

PS: Am I right that the TCP_RR tests should only be run on a single node 
at a time, not on both ends simultaneously?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html