netdev - Re: Multicast packet loss

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]

Date:	Tue, 03 Feb 2009 10:20:13 -0500
From:	Kenny Chang <kchang@...enacr.com>
To:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Multicast packet loss

Neil Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 02, 2009 at 11:48:25AM -0500, Kenny Chang wrote:
>   
>> Neil Horman wrote:
>>     
>>> On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 11:41:23PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> Kenny Chang a écrit :
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>>> Ah, sorry, here's the test program attached.
>>>>>
>>>>> We've tried 2.6.28.1, but no, we haven't tried the 2.6.28.2 or the
>>>>> 2.6.29.-rcX.
>>>>>
>>>>> Right now, we are trying to step through the kernel versions until we
>>>>> see where the performance drops significantly.  We'll try 2.6.29-rc soon
>>>>> and post the result.
>>>>>       
>>>>>           
>>>> 2.6.29-rc contains UDP receive improvements (lockless)
>>>>
>>>> Problem is multicast handling was not yet updated, but could be :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I was asking you "cat /proc/interrupts" because I believe you might
>>>> have a problem NIC interrupts being handled by one CPU only (when having problems)
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> That would be expected (if irqbalance is running), and desireable, since
>>> spreading high volume interrupts like NICS accross multiple cores (or more
>>> specifically multiple L2 caches), is going increase your cache line miss rate
>>> significantly and decrease rx throughput.
>>>
>>> Although you do have a point here, if the system isn't running irqbalance, and
>>> the NICS irq affinity is spread accross multiple L2 caches, that would be a
>>> point of improvement performance-wise.  
>>>
>>> Kenny, if you could provide the /proc/interrupts info along with /proc/cpuinfo
>>> and your stats that I asked about earlier, that would be a big help.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Neil
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>> This is for a working setup.
>>
>>     
>
> Are these quad core systems?  Or dual core w/ hyperthreading?  I ask because in
> your working setup you have 1/2 the number of cpus' and was not sure if you
> removed an entire package of if you just disabled hyperthreading.
>
>
> Neil
>
>   
Yeah, these are quad core systems.  The 8 cpu system is a dual-processor 
quad-core.  The other is my desktop, single cpu quad core.

Kenny

--
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