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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1271769195.7895.4.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date:	Tue, 20 Apr 2010 15:13:15 +0200
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	hadi@...erus.ca
Cc:	Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>, Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, therbert@...gle.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, robert@...julf.net, andi@...stfloor.org
Subject: Re: rps perfomance WAS(Re: rps: question

Le mardi 20 avril 2010 à 08:02 -0400, jamal a écrit : 
> folks,
> 
> Thanks to everybody (Eric stands out) for your patience. 
> I ended mostly validating whats already been said. I have a lot of data
> and can describe in details how i tested etc but it would require
> patience in reading, so i will spare you;-> If you are interested let me
> know and i will be happy to share.
> 
> Summary is: 
> -rps good, gives higher throughput for apps
> -rps not so good, latency worse but gets better with higher input rate
> or increasing number of flows (which translates to higher pps)
> -rps works well with newer hardware that has better cache structures.
> [Gives great results on my test machine a Nehalem single processor, 4
> cores each with two SMT threads that has a shared L2 between threads and
> a shared L3 between cores]. 
> Your selection of what the demux cpu is and where the target cpus are is
> an influencing factor in the latency results. If you have a system with
> multiple sockets, you should get better numbers if you stay within the
> same socket relative to going across sockets.
> -rps does a better job at helping schedule apps on same cpu thus
> localizing the app. The throughput results with rps are very consistent
> and better whereas in non-rps case, variance is _high_.
> 
> My next step is to do some forwarding tests - probably next week. I am
> concerned here because i expect the cache misses to be higher than the
> app scenario (netdev structure and attributes could be touched by many
> cpus)
> 

Hi Jamal

I think your tests are very interesting, maybe could you publish them
somehow ? (I forgot to thank you about the previous report and nice
graph)

perf reports would be good too to help to spot hot points.



--
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