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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090506204759.GA16681@francoudi.com>
Date:	Wed, 6 May 2009 23:47:59 +0300
From:	Vladimir Ivashchenko <hazard@...ncoudi.com>
To:	Denys Fedoryschenko <denys@...p.net.lb>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: bond + tc regression ?

On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 10:30:04PM +0300, Denys Fedoryschenko wrote:

> > 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.

This is a dual-core machine, isn't cache shared between the cores?

Without IRQ balancing, one of the cores goes around 10% idle and HTB doesn't do
its job properly. Actually, in my experience HTB stops working properly after
idle goes below 35%.

I'll try gathering some stats using oprofile.

-- 
Best Regards
Vladimir Ivashchenko
Chief Technology Officer
PrimeTel, Cyprus - www.prime-tel.com
--
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