[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1239301412.3264.24.camel@achroite>
Date: Thu, 09 Apr 2009 19:23:32 +0100
From: Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To: Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, shemminger@...tta.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Software receive packet steering
On Thu, 2009-04-09 at 09:43 -0700, Tom Herbert wrote:
> >>> -extern int netif_receive_skb(struct sk_buff *skb);
> >>> +extern int __netif_receive_skb(struct sk_buff *skb);
> >>> +
> >>> +static inline int netif_receive_skb(struct sk_buff *skb)
> >>> +{
> >>> +#ifdef CONFIG_NET_SOFTRPS
> >>> + return netif_rx(skb);
> >>> +#else
> >>> + return __netif_receive_skb(skb);
> >>> +#endif
> >>> +}
> >>
> >> Ugh, this forces all devices receiving back into a single backlog
> >> queue.
> >
> > Yes, it basically turns off NAPI.
> >
>
> NAPI is still useful, but it does take a higher packet load before
> polling kicks in. I believe this is similarly true for HW multi
> queue, and could actually be worse depending on the number of queues
> traffic is being split across (in my bnx2x experiment 16 core AMD with
> 16 queues, I was seeing around 300K interrupts per second, no benefit
> from NAPI).
[...]
Have you tried using fewer than 16 queues? We found using every core in
a multi-core package to be a waste of cycles.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings, Senior Software Engineer, Solarflare Communications
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.
--
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