[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <490AE1CD.9040207@cosmosbay.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 11:45:33 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi, shemminger@...tta.com, zbr@...emap.net,
rjw@...k.pl, mingo@...e.hu, s0mbre@...rvice.net.ru,
a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, efault@....de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [tbench regression fixes]: digging out smelly deadmen.
David Miller a écrit :
> From: "Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
> Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 11:40:16 +0200 (EET)
>
>> Let me remind that it is just a single process, so no ping-pong & other
>> lock related cache effects should play any significant role here, no? (I'm
>> no expert though :-)).
>
> Not locks or ping-pongs perhaps, I guess. So it just sends and
> receives over a socket, implementing both ends of the communication
> in the same process?
>
> If hash chain conflicts do happen for those 2 sockets, just traversing
> the chain 2 entries deep could show up.
tbench is very sensible to cache line ping-pongs (on SMP machines of course)
Just to prove my point, I coded the following patch and tried it
on a HP BL460c G1. This machine has 2 quad cores cpu
(Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5450 @3.00GHz)
tbench 8 went from 2240 MB/s to 2310 MB/s after this patch applied
[PATCH] net: Introduce netif_set_last_rx() helper
On SMP machine, loopback device (and possibly others net device)
should try to avoid dirty the memory cache line containing "last_rx"
field. Got 3% increase on tbench on a 8 cpus machine.
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
---
drivers/net/loopback.c | 2 +-
include/linux/netdevice.h | 16 ++++++++++++++++
2 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
View attachment "netif_set_last_rx.patch" of type "text/plain" (1233 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists