[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1384220059.13547.17.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Nov 2013 17:34:19 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Ethan Zhao <ethan.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: Ashok Raj <ashok.raj@...el.com>,
Anil S Keshavamurthy <anil.s.keshavamurthy@...el.com>,
Fenghua Yu <fenghua.yu@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Got iperf regression while intel_iommu is on, how to cut the
cost of cache flushing
On Tue, 2013-11-12 at 09:03 +0800, Ethan Zhao wrote:
> Eric,
> We have tested the performance with the TSO and TSQ patches
> merged, the result not good, even worse than kernel without those two
> patches. any idea ?
>
> kernel : 3.11.x with TSO & TSQ merged. ( CONFIG_INTEL_IOMMU_DEFAULT_ON=y )
> Network Interface : eth4
> Network driver : be2net
>
> Average Bandwidth for :
> 1.tcp-unidirectional test : 4385 Mbits/sec
> 2.tcp-unidirectional-parallel: 9383 Mbits/sec
> 3.tcp-bidirectonal test : 2755 Mbits/sec
>
> vs
>
> kernel : 3.11.x without TSO & TSQ patches.
> (CONFIG_INTEL_IOMMU_DEFAULT_ON is not set)
> Network Interface : eth4
> Network driver : be2net
>
> Average Bandwidth for :
> 1.tcp-unidirectional test : 7992 Mbits/sec
> 2.tcp-unidirectional-parallel: 9403 Mbits/sec
> 3.tcp-bidirectonal test : 5802 Mbits/sec
>
So it seems its not the TSO/TSQ changes, but
CONFIG_INTEL_IOMMU_DEFAULT_ON being on instead of off.
--
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