netdev - Re: cpu utilisation improvement when not doing netif_tx_{stop,wake}

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: <20080829144652.GB1290@xi.wantstofly.org>
Date:	Fri, 29 Aug 2008 16:46:52 +0200
From:	Lennert Buytenhek <buytenh@...tstofly.org>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc:	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, dale@...nsworth.org,
	nico@....org
Subject: Re: cpu utilisation improvement when not doing netif_tx_{stop,wake}_queue()

On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 05:15:20PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:

> > I.e. transmitting wire speed gigabit over a single TCP session takes
> > around 90% CPU time (measured with cyclesoak) if I have the TX queue
> > flow control enabled, but only 70% if I rip the TX queue flow control
> > out.  (This is on a relatively underpowered ARM box.)
> 
> How many cores and how many queues?

One core (at 1.0GHz), and one queue in use at the moment.
--
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