netdev - Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [RFC][PATCH 2/2] bgmac: pass received packet to the netif instead of copying it

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CACna6ryV5hkTdJApdOT8rihHoxf_2-cdT4-1F3Muc2HVjiDwow@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 19 Aug 2013 19:20:48 +0200
From:	Rafał Miłecki <zajec5@...il.com>
To:	Felix Fietkau <nbd@...nwrt.org>
Cc:	OpenWrt Development List <openwrt-devel@...ts.openwrt.org>,
	Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Hauke Mehrtens <hauke@...ke-m.de>,
	Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
	Jonas Gorski <jogo@...nwrt.org>,
	Robert Bradley <robert.bradley1@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [OpenWrt-Devel] [RFC][PATCH 2/2] bgmac: pass received packet to
 the netif instead of copying it

2013/8/19 Felix Fietkau <nbd@...nwrt.org>:
> On 2013-08-15 10:21 PM, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>> I'm afraid this "perf top" output doesn't really tell us where to look
>> for optimizations :| I'll still try Felix ideas tomorrow, but I'm not
>> sure if they help, since there isn't __copy_user_common anymore in the
>> "perf top" output...
> What's the CPU load while passing traffic without running perf?

During "ping 192.168.5.1"

# top
Mem: 19564K used, 107076K free, 0K shrd, 0K buff, 12916K cached
CPU: 0% usr 0% sys 0% nic 99% idle 0% io 0% irq 0% sirq
Load average: 0.17 0.10 0.04 1/24 810

# perf top
PerfTop: 261 irqs/sec kernel:100.0% exact: 0.0% [4000Hz cycles], (all, 1 CPU)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

64.21% [kernel] [k] arch_cpu_idle
16.38% [kernel] [k] arch_local_irq_restore
12.01% [kernel] [k] cpu_startup_entry
2.16% [kernel] [k] rcu_idle_exit

During "iperf -c 192.168.5.1"

# top
Mem: 19572K used, 107068K free, 0K shrd, 0K buff, 12916K cached
CPU: 0% usr 0% sys 0% nic 3% idle 0% io 0% irq 96% sirq
Load average: 0.29 0.11 0.04 1/24 809
PID PPID USER STAT VSZ %VSZ %CPU COMMAND
3 2 root RW 0 0% 9% [ksoftirqd/0]
809 376 root R 1496 1% 2% top
716 1 nobody S 964 1% 1% /usr/sbin/dnsmasq -C /var/etc/dnsmasq

# perf top
PerfTop: 265 irqs/sec kernel:100.0% exact: 0.0% [4000Hz cycles], (all, 1 CPU)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

6.41% [ip_tables] [k] ipt_do_table
4.01% [bgmac] [k] 0x000006ec
3.43% [kernel] [k] arch_cpu_idle
3.30% [kernel] [k] arch_local_irq_restore
3.25% [kernel] [k] ip_rcv
3.11% [nf_conntrack] [k] nf_conntrack_proto_fini
3.11% [nf_conntrack] [k] nf_conntrack_in


> Have you tested bridging performance?

Do you mean connecting both machines to the same VLAN? Like 2 LAN
ports in the standard configuration? It gives me ~600Mb/s using
OpenWrt. It's pretty much the same performance I got with the original
firmware for transfer between 2 VLANs.

[ 5] local 192.168.1.218 port 5001 connected with 192.168.1.131 port 59463
[ 5] 0.0-60.0 sec 4.16 GBytes 596 Mbits/sec

-- 
Rafał
--
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