[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <513A1F36.5020401@hp.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Mar 2013 09:26:14 -0800
From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC: Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>, KVM <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
jpirko@...hat.com
Subject: Re: TCP small packets throughput and multiqueue virtio-net
>
> Well, the point is : if your app does write(1024) bytes, thats probably
> because it wants small packets from the very beginning. (See the TCP
> PUSH flag ?)
I think that raises the question of whether or not Jason was setting the
test-specific -D option on his TCP_STREAM tests, to have netperf make a
setsockopt(TCP_NODELAY) call.
happy benchmarking,
rick jones
> If the transport is slow, TCP stack will automatically collapse several
> write into single skbs (assuming TSO or GSO is on), and you'll see big
> GSO packets with tcpdump [1]. So TCP will help you to get less overhead
> in this case.
>
> But if transport is fast, you'll see small packets, and thats good for
> latency.
>
> So my opinion is : its exactly behaving as expected.
>
> If you want bigger packets either :
> - Make the application doing big write()
> - Slow the vmexit ;)
>
> [1] GSO fools tcpdump : Actual packets sent to the wire are not 'big
> packets', but they hit dev_hard_start_xmit() as GSO packets.
>
>
>
> --
> 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
>
--
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