netdev - Re: [PATCHES] TX batching

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

Message-Id: <1191936342.4373.187.camel@localhost>
Date:	Tue, 09 Oct 2007 09:25:42 -0400
From:	jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
To:	Krishna Kumar2 <krkumar2@...ibm.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, gaagaan@...il.com,
	general@...ts.openfabrics.org, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
	jagana@...ibm.com, jeff@...zik.org,
	Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>, kaber@...sh.net,
	kumarkr@...ux.ibm.com, mcarlson@...adcom.com, mchan@...adcom.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com,
	randy.dunlap@...cle.com, rdreier@...co.com, rick.jones2@...com,
	Robert.Olsson@...a.slu.se, shemminger@...ux-foundation.org,
	sri@...ibm.com, tgraf@...g.ch, xma@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHES] TX batching

On Tue, 2007-09-10 at 13:44 +0530, Krishna Kumar2 wrote:

> My feeling is that since the approaches are very different, 

My concern is the approaches are different only for short periods of
time. For example, I do requeueing, have xmit_win, have ->end_xmit,
do batching from core etc; if you see value in any of these concepts,
they will appear in your patches and this goes on a loop. Perhaps what
we need is a referee and use our energies in something more positive.

> it would be a good idea to test the two for performance. 

Which i dont mind as long as it has an analysis that goes with it.
If all you post is "heres what netperf showed", it is not useful at all.
There are also a lot of affecting variables. For example, is the
receiver a bottleneck? To make it worse, I could demonstrate to you that
if i slowed down the driver and allowed more packets to queue up on the
qdisc, batching will do well. In the past my feeling is you glossed over
such details and i am sucker for things like that - hence the conflict.

> Do you mind me doing
> that? Ofcourse others and/or you are more than welcome to do the same.
> 
> I had sent a note to you yesterday about this, please let me know
> either way.
> 

I responded to you - but it may have been lost in the noise; heres a
copy:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=119185137124008&w=2

cheers,
jamal

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html