[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49E76906.2060205@hp.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2009 10:21:10 -0700
From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To: Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>
CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Network latency regressions from 2.6.22 to 2.6.29
Christoph Lameter wrote:
> The following are results of lantency measurements using udpping
> (available from http://gentwo.org/ll). It shows that significant latencies
> were added since 2.6.27. I surely wish we could get back to times below 90
> microseconds.
>
> The tests were done over 1G ethernet using
> 09:00.0 Ethernet controller: Broadcom Corporation NetXtreme BCM5754
> Gigabit Ethernet PCI Express (rev 02)
>
> Results:
>
> 2.6.22 2.6.23 2.6.24 2.6.25 2.6.26 2.6.27 2.6.28 2.6.29
> 40 Bytes 89.50 90.75 89.61 91.51 91.89 99.17 99.80 99.34
> 400 Bytes 98.58 101.44 97.85 99.61 100.36 117.96 118.10 126.79
> 1400 Bytes 152.76 153.75 153.85 156.22 156.66 163.92 165.54 166.04
>
> Compared to 2.6.22 2.6.23 2.6.24 2.6.25 2.6.26 2.6.27 2.6.28 2.6.29
> 40 Bytes -1.4% -0.1% -2.2% -2.6% -9.8% -10.3% -9.9%
> 400 Bytes -2.8% 0.7% -1.0% -1.8% -16.4% -16.5%-22.2%
> 1400 Bytes -0.6% -0.7% -2.2% -2.5% -6.8% -7.7% -8.0%
>
> I presented these numbers with some nice graphs at the Linux Collab Summit
> last week.
>
> See
> http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/christoph/collab-spring-2009/Collab-summit-2009-sf.pdf
Does udpping have a concept of service demand a la netperf? That could help show
how much was code bloat vs say some tweak to interrupt coalescing parameters in
the NIC/driver.
[root@...70c1 netperf2_trunk]# netperf -T 0 -c -C -t UDP_RR -H bl870c2.west -v 2
UDP REQUEST/RESPONSE TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to bl870c2.west
(10.208.0.210) port 0 AF_INET : histogram : first burst 0 : cpu bind
Local /Remote
Socket Size Request Resp. Elapsed Trans. CPU CPU S.dem S.dem
Send Recv Size Size Time Rate local remote local remote
bytes bytes bytes bytes secs. per sec % S % S us/Tr us/Tr
126976 126976 1 1 10.00 7550.46 2.33 2.41 24.721 25.551
126976 126976
Histogram of request/reponse times.
UNIT_USEC : 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0
TEN_USEC : 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 1
HUNDRED_USEC : 0: 75508: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0
UNIT_MSEC : 0: 2: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0
TEN_MSEC : 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0
HUNDRED_MSEC : 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0
UNIT_SEC : 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0
TEN_SEC : 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0
>100_SECS: 0
HIST_TOTAL: 75511
I guess one of these days I have to tweak netperf to be able to get latencies
when doing bursts on the connection...
[root@...70c1 netperf2_trunk]# ethtool -C eth0 rx-frames 1
[do the same on the other end]
[root@...70c1 netperf2_trunk]# netperf -T 0 -c -C -t UDP_RR -H bl870c2.west -v 2
UDP REQUEST/RESPONSE TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to bl870c2.west
(10.208.0.210) port 0 AF_INET : histogram : first burst 0 : cpu bind
Local /Remote
Socket Size Request Resp. Elapsed Trans. CPU CPU S.dem S.dem
Send Recv Size Size Time Rate local remote local remote
bytes bytes bytes bytes secs. per sec % S % S us/Tr us/Tr
126976 126976 1 1 10.00 11126.15 2.60 3.43 18.711 24.633
126976 126976
Histogram of request/reponse times.
UNIT_USEC : 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0
TEN_USEC : 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 16: 71799: 38583
HUNDRED_USEC : 0: 856: 8: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0
UNIT_MSEC : 0: 1: 0: 0: 0: 0: 1: 0: 0: 0
TEN_MSEC : 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0
HUNDRED_MSEC : 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0
UNIT_SEC : 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0
TEN_SEC : 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0: 0
>100_SECS: 0
HIST_TOTAL: 111264
--
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