[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1304838742.3207.45.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Sun, 08 May 2011 09:12:22 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Alex Bligh <alex@...x.org.uk>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org,
"Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Scalability of interface creation and deletion
Le samedi 07 mai 2011 à 20:42 +0200, Eric Dumazet a écrit :
> Here is my trace here for one device deletion on one 8 core machine
>
> [ 800.447012] synchronize_rcu() in 15787 us
> [ 800.455013] synchronize_rcu() in 7682 us
> [ 800.464019] rcu_barrier() in 8487 us
>
> Not that bad.
>
> $ grep RCU .config
> # RCU Subsystem
> CONFIG_TREE_RCU=y
> # CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU is not set
> CONFIG_RCU_TRACE=y
> CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT=32
> # CONFIG_RCU_FANOUT_EXACT is not set
> # CONFIG_RCU_FAST_NO_HZ is not set
> CONFIG_TREE_RCU_TRACE=y
>
By the way, if I change HZ from 1000 to 100 I now have ten times slower
result :
# ip link add link eth0 eth0.103 type vlan id 103
# time ip link del eth0.103
real 0m0.430s
user 0m0.000s
sys 0m0.000s
So all this is related to your HZ value, even in a CONFIG_NO_HZ=y
kernel. Alex, I guess you have HZ=250 ?
# uname -a
Linux svivoipvnx021 2.6.39-rc6-00214-g5511a34-dirty #574 SMP Sun May 8
08:44:14 CEST 2011 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
# cat /proc/cmdline
I enabled CONFIG_RCU_FAST_NO_HZ and got worse results (but not
alsways... its very variable)
# time ip link del eth0.103
real 0m0.544s
user 0m0.000s
sys 0m0.000s
# time ip link del eth0.103
real 0m0.414s
user 0m0.000s
sys 0m0.000s
--
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