[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1369143099.3301.216.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Date: Tue, 21 May 2013 06:31:39 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Alex Rosenbaum <alexr@...lanox.com>
Cc: Eliezer Tamir <eliezer.tamir@...ux.intel.com>,
Dave Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
Don Skidmore <donald.c.skidmore@...el.com>,
e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, HPA <hpa@...or.com>,
Eliezer Tamir <eliezer@...ir.org.il>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 0/4] net: low latency Ethernet device polling
On Tue, 2013-05-21 at 16:15 +0300, Alex Rosenbaum wrote:
> On 5/21/2013 3:29 PM, Eliezer Tamir wrote:
> > What benchmarks are you using to test poll/select/epoll?
> for epoll/select latency tests we are using sockperf as performance
> latency tool: https://code.google.com/p/sockperf/
> It is a client-server based tool and it supported ping-pong, throughput,
> and under-load test type.
> For epoll, you will need to define a 'feedfile' ("-f filepathname")
> which has a list of TCP and/or UDP socket and defined your IO mux type
> ("-F epoll").
I totally agree, most modern applications use poll/select/epoll,
and a fair amount of sockets per task, sendfile()/vmsplice()/... and
netperf is not using same paths.
Thanks Alex !
--
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