[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHrpEqTqSfBCpoMZ9S81VoXWgVK1iOR+e2OasARgbTD8m_RRvw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2013 15:37:43 +0800
From: Frank Li <lznuaa@...il.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: Frank Li <Frank.Li@...escale.com>, shawn.guo@...aro.org,
B38611@...escale.com, davem@...emloft.net,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
bhutchings@...arflare.com, s.hauer@...gutronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2 net-next] net: fec: add napi support to improve proformance
2013/1/23 Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>:
> On Wed, 2013-01-23 at 12:12 +0800, Frank Li wrote:
>> Add napi support
>>
>> Before this patch
>>
>> iperf -s -i 1
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> Server listening on TCP port 5001
>> TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default)
>> ------------------------------------------------------------
>> [ 4] local 10.192.242.153 port 5001 connected with 10.192.242.138 port 50004
>> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
>> [ 4] 0.0- 1.0 sec 41.2 MBytes 345 Mbits/sec
>> [ 4] 1.0- 2.0 sec 43.7 MBytes 367 Mbits/sec
>> [ 4] 2.0- 3.0 sec 42.8 MBytes 359 Mbits/sec
>> [ 4] 3.0- 4.0 sec 43.7 MBytes 367 Mbits/sec
>> [ 4] 4.0- 5.0 sec 42.7 MBytes 359 Mbits/sec
>> [ 4] 5.0- 6.0 sec 43.8 MBytes 367 Mbits/sec
>> [ 4] 6.0- 7.0 sec 43.0 MBytes 361 Mbits/sec
>>
>> After this patch
>> [ 4] 2.0- 3.0 sec 51.6 MBytes 433 Mbits/sec
>> [ 4] 3.0- 4.0 sec 51.8 MBytes 435 Mbits/sec
>> [ 4] 4.0- 5.0 sec 52.2 MBytes 438 Mbits/sec
>> [ 4] 5.0- 6.0 sec 52.1 MBytes 437 Mbits/sec
>> [ 4] 6.0- 7.0 sec 52.1 MBytes 437 Mbits/sec
>> [ 4] 7.0- 8.0 sec 52.3 MBytes 439 Mbits/sec
>
> Strange, as you still call netif_rx()
>
> NAPI should call netif_receive_skb() instead
>
Thank you point out.
After re-test, I found performance is almost no change if use netif_receive_skb.
I am not sure if it is my NAPI implement problem.
napi_gro_received is better than netif_receive_skb, but worse than netif_rx.
>From performance point view,
netif_rx --- fastest
napi_gro_received --- middle, near to netif_rx
netif_receive_skb --- slowest, almost the same as original no-napi version.
Do you have any idea about this phenomena?
best regards
Frank Li
>
>
--
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