netdev - Re: Using HTB over MultiQ

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: <527CFF2C.2020605@intel.com>
Date:	Fri, 08 Nov 2013 07:11:40 -0800
From:	John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC:	Anton 'EvilMan' Danilov <littlesmilingcloud@...il.com>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Using HTB over MultiQ

On 11/8/2013 7:07 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Fri, 2013-11-08 at 18:53 +0400, Anton 'EvilMan' Danilov wrote:
>
>> Over 60 percent of 'perf top' is _raw_spin_lock function.
>> Speed of traffic is near 6Gbit/s, packet rate ~ 1.3 Mpps. But this
>> speed are limited by shaper.
>
> Please post :
>
> ethtool -S eth0  # or other nics
>
> perf record -a -g sleep 10
>
> perf report | tail -n 200
>
> And possibly it would be nice if you send your tc script so that we can
> check ;)
>

perf would be interesting but note that multiq still uses the root qdisc
lock which you original stated you were trying to avoid.

mq and mqprio are really the only two existing qdiscs that work well for
performance with small packet sizes and multiqueue nics at least in my
experience/setup with these kinds of micro-benchmarks.

.John

--
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