netdev - Re: bond + tc regression ?

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: <200905062230.04594.denys@visp.net.lb>
Date:	Wed, 6 May 2009 22:30:04 +0300
From:	Denys Fedoryschenko <denys@...p.net.lb>
To:	Vladimir Ivashchenko <hazard@...ncoudi.com>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: bond + tc regression ?

On Wednesday 06 May 2009 21:45:18 Vladimir Ivashchenko wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-05-06 at 05:36 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > Ah, I forgot about one patch that could help your setup too (if using
> > more than one cpu on NIC irqs of course), queued for 2.6.31
>
> I have tried the patch. Didn't make a noticeable difference. Under 850
> mbps HTB+sfq load, 2.6.29.1, four NICs / two bond ifaces, IRQ balancing,
> the dual-core server has only 25% idle on each CPU.
>
> What's interesting, the same 850mbps load, identical machine, but with
> only two NICs and no bond, HTB+esfq, kernel 2.6.21.2 => 60% CPU idle.
> 2.5x overhead.

Probably oprofile can sched some light on this.
On my own experience IRQ balancing hurt performance a lot, because of cache 
misses.

--
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