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]

Message-ID: <49B59EA3.3000208@athenacr.com>
Date:	Mon, 09 Mar 2009 18:56:35 -0400
From:	Brian Bloniarz <bmb@...enacr.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
CC:	kchang@...enacr.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Multicast packet loss

Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Here is a patch that helps. It's still an RFC of course, since its somewhat ugly :)

Hi Eric,

I did some experimenting with this patch today -- we're users, not kernel hackers,
but the performance looks great. We see no loss with mcasttest, and no loss with
our internal test programs (which do much more user-space work). We're very
encouraged :)

One thing I'm curious about: previously, setting /proc/irq/<eth0>/smp_affinity
to one CPU made things perform better, but with this patch, performance is better
with smp_affinity == ff than with smp_affinity == 1. Do you know why that
is? Our tests are all with bnx2 msi_disable=1. I can investigate with oprofile
tomorrow.

Thank you for your continued help, we all deeply appreciate having someone
looking at this workload.

Thanks,
Brian Bloniarz
--
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