[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1357219919.21409.24519.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2013 05:31:59 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: sedat.dilek@...il.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] softirq: reduce latencies
On Thu, 2013-01-03 at 14:12 +0100, Sedat Dilek wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> your patch from [2] applies cleanly on top of Linux v3.8-rc2.
> I would like to test it.
> In [1] you were talking about benchmarks you did.
> Can you describe them or provide a testcase (script etc.)?
> You made only network testing?
Yes I did network testing :
- net_rx_action() softirq handler is the typical function that can
consume 2 ms per call.
I did some netperf sessions, with multiqueue 10G nics, tuned to that IRQ
would be handled by few cpus.
(check /proc/irq/*/eth0-$QUEUE/../smp_affinity )
Another way to make the softirq processing use more cpu cycles is by
adding a fake iptable setup like :
for n in `seq 1 100`
do
iptables -I INPUT
done
A common network load is to launch ~200 concurrent TCP_RR netperf
sessions like the following
netperf -H remote_host -t TCP_RR -l 1000
And then you can launch some netperf asking P99_LATENCY results :
netperf -H remote_host -t TCP_RR -- -k P99_LATENCY
You can play with taskset or netperf option -T to force
netperf/netserver running on given cpus.
--
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