linux-kernel - Re: Improved UDP performance using 2.6.21-rc5-rt10

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <040320071326.11440.461256000007192600002CB02207300793979D9D0A9F9C0E0B@comcast.net>
Date:	Tue, 03 Apr 2007 13:26:24 +0000
From:	dasperry@...cast.net (dave_sperry@...e.org)
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, David Sperry <dave_sperry@...e.org>
Cc:	linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Improved UDP performance using 2.6.21-rc5-rt10

rt10 shows a big improvement over rt8

##################################################
etup                    Thruput      CPU% 
Nvidia
2.6.21-rc5-rt8           938          65%
   netperf @51
   hardirq @50
   softirq @50

Nvidia
2.6.21-rc5-rt10           938          32%
   netperf @51
   hardirq @50
   softirq @50

very nice for a "work in progress" 

I ran the netperf test a few times and one of the times the netperf test would no longer talk to the server. I had to reboot the rt client to get netperf to talk again. I did have cycle soak running which may have contributed to the problem.

Also when netperf is not running the hard IRQs associated with the NIC use a constant 2% load.


Thanks,
Dave


 -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
> 
> * David Sperry <dave_sperry@...e.org> wrote:
> 
> > > there are a few other things i'm working on to improve this. I've 
> > > uploaded -rt9 which is the current state of affairs. Note that using 
> > > -rt9 you'll likely only see IRQ-8406 overhead in the system, because 
> > > i've added an optimization to do process the softirq-net-tx workload 
> > > in the hardirq thread if the priority of the two is the same (which 
> > > is the default behavior). But -rt9 is still work in progress that is 
> > > not fully finished yet: in some cases i'm seeing 'fluctuating 
> > > performance' problems on forcedeth that werent there before.
> > 
> > I tried -rt9 and saw some odd 'fluctuating performance'. I'll try it 
> > again tomorrow when I am much closer to the box's power button.
> 
> could you try -rt10? I've improved hardirq/softirq threading performance 
> some more, and have tuned the forcedeth driver too.
> 
> 	Ingo

-
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/