[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100129113346.GB1309@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 22:33:46 +1100
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To: Krishna Kumar2 <krkumar2@...ibm.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Optimize TCP sendmsg in favour of fast devices?
On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 04:45:01PM +0530, Krishna Kumar2 wrote:
>
> Same 5 runs of single netperf's:
>
> 0. Driver unsets F_SG but sets F_GSO:
> Org (16K): BW: 18180.71 SD: 13.485
> New (16K): BW: 18113.15 SD: 13.551
> Org (64K): BW: 21980.28 SD: 10.306
> New (64K): BW: 21386.59 SD: 10.447
>
> 1. Driver unsets F_SG, and with GSO off
> Org (16K): BW: 10894.62 SD: 26.591
> New (16K): BW: 7262.10 SD: 35.340
> Org (64K): BW: 12396.41 SD: 23.357
> New (64K): BW: 7853.02 SD: 32.405
>
>
> 2. Driver unsets F_SG and uses ethtool to set GSO:
> Org (16K): BW: 18094.11 SD: 13.603
> New (16K): BW: 17952.38 SD: 13.743
> Org (64K): BW: 21540.78 SD: 10.771
> New (64K): BW: 21818.35 SD: 10.598
Hmm, any idea what is causing case 0 to be different from case 2?
In particular, the 64K performance in case 0 appears to be a
regression but in case 2 it's showing up as an improvement.
AFAICS these two cases should produce identical results, or is
this just jitter across tests?
Thanks,
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
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