netdev - Re: rps perfomance WAS(Re: rps: question

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]

Date:	Wed, 14 Apr 2010 12:44:26 -0700
From:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
To:	hadi@...erus.ca
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	robert@...julf.net, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: rps perfomance WAS(Re: rps: question

On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 14:53:42 -0400
jamal <hadi@...erus.ca> wrote:

> Agreed. So to enumerate, the benefits come in if:
> a) you have many processors
> b) you have single-queue nic
> c) at sub-threshold traffic you dont care about a little latency

There probably needs to be better autotuning for this, there is no reason
that RPS to be steering packets unless the queue is getting backed up.
Some kind of high / low water mark mechanism is needed.

RPS might also interact with the core turbo boost functionality on Intel chips.
Newer chips will make a single core faster if other core can be kept idle.


-- 
--
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