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:	Thu, 19 Mar 2009 13:52:43 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	ghaskins@...ell.com
Cc:	vernux@...ibm.com, andi@...stfloor.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@...r.kernel.org,
	pmullaney@...ell.com
Subject: Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock

From: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:42:33 -0400

> David Miller wrote:
> > From: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@...ell.com>
> > Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 23:48:46 -0400
> >
> >   
> >> To see this in action, try taking a moderately large smp system
> >> (8-way+) and scaling the number of flows.
> >>     
> >
> > I can maintain line-rate over 10GB with a 64-cpu box.
> Oh man, I am jealous of that 64-way :)
> 
> How many simultaneous flows?  What hardware?  What qdisc and other
> config do you use?  MTU?  I cannot replicate such results on 10GB even
> with much smaller cpu counts.

Sun Neptune NIU 10G with 24 TX queues.

And it's all because of the number of TX queues, nothing more.

It is essential for good performance with any level of cpu
arity.

--
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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ