[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1163034527.5931.56.camel@raj-laptop>
Date: Wed, 08 Nov 2006 17:08:47 -0800
From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To: Olaf Kirch <okir@...e.de>
Cc: Tim Chen <tim.c.chen@...ux.intel.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, davem@...set.davemloft.net,
kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.19-rc1: Volanomark slowdown
On Wed, 2006-11-08 at 23:10 +0100, Olaf Kirch wrote:
> What I'm saying though is that it doesn't rhyme with what I've seen of
> Volanomark - we ran 2.6.16 on a 4p Intel box for instance and it didn't
> come close to saturating a Gigabit pipe before it maxed out on CPU load.
That actually supports the hypothesis doesn't it? The issue being the
increased number of ACKs causing additional CPU overhead not saturating
a NIC if any involved.
One of these days I may have to try to look more closely at what volano
does relative to netperf - I remember that someone tried very hard (was
it you alexy?) to show a perfomance effect with netperf and it didn't do
it :(
rick jones
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists