[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1285850812.2615.432.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 14:46:52 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Alexey Vlasov <renton@...ton.name>
Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Packet time delays on multi-core systems
Le jeudi 30 septembre 2010 à 16:30 +0400, Alexey Vlasov a écrit :
> On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 11:45:21PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > But if you send SYN packets in the same time, (logged), this might
> > slow
> > down the reception (and answers) of ICMP frames. LOG target can be
> > quite
> > expensive...
>
> Yes, it's clear that some slow down can appear, but 100 ms is too much,
> and this happens at 200 SYN packets in 2 minutes just as in my example.
> On old servers where some tx/rx are missing in NIC card I don't see
> such a situation even at more then 1000 SYN-packets per sec.
Because all cpus were servicing interrupts, which was good for your
needs. Things apparently changed with 2.6.32.
You have a multiqueue NIC, but using a single CPU to handle the
workload.
>
> > Is using other rules gives same problem ?
> >
> > iptables -A OUTPUT -p tcp -m tcp --dport 80 --tcp-flags
>
> No, only LOG gives such a scheme.
>
--
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