netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 0/10] bql: Byte Queue Limits

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]

Message-ID: <1322576645.7454.48.camel@deadeye>
Date:	Tue, 29 Nov 2011 14:24:05 +0000
From:	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC:	Dave Taht <dave.taht@...il.com>, Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>,
	<davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/10] bql: Byte Queue Limits

On Tue, 2011-11-29 at 08:02 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le mardi 29 novembre 2011 à 05:23 +0100, Dave Taht a écrit :
> > > In this test 100 netperf TCP_STREAMs were started to saturate the link.
> > > A single instance of a netperf TCP_RR was run with high priority set.
> > > Queuing discipline in pfifo_fast, NIC is e1000 with TX ring size set to
> > > 1024.  tps for the high priority RR is listed.
> > >
> > > No BQL, tso on: 3000-3200K bytes in queue: 36 tps
> > > BQL, tso on: 156-194K bytes in queue, 535 tps
> > 
> > > No BQL, tso off: 453-454K bytes int queue, 234 tps
> > > BQL, tso off: 66K bytes in queue, 914 tps
> > 
> > 
> > Jeeze. Under what circumstances is tso a win? I've always
> > had great trouble with it, as some e1000 cards do it rather badly.
> > 
> > I assume these are while running at GigE speeds?
> > 
> > What of 100Mbit? 10GigE? (I will duplicate your tests
> > at 100Mbit, but as for 10gigE...)
> > 
> 
> TSO on means a low priority 65Kbytes packet can be in TX ring right
> before the high priority packet. If you cant afford the delay, you lose.
> 
> There is no mystery here.
> 
> If you want low latencies :
> - TSO must be disabled so that packets are at most one ethernet frame. 
[...]

Not if you separate hardware queues by priority (and your high priority
packets are non-TCP or PuSHed).

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare
Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job.
They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.

--
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