netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] mlx4_en: Add PTP hardware clock

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]

Date:	Wed, 25 Dec 2013 12:53:24 +0100
From:	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
To:	Hadar Hen Zion <hadarh@...lanox.com>
Cc:	Shawn Bohrer <shawn.bohrer@...il.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
	Amir Vadai <amirv@...lanox.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	tomk@...advisors.com, Shawn Bohrer <sbohrer@...advisors.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] mlx4_en: Add PTP hardware clock

On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 03:58:06PM +0200, Hadar Hen Zion wrote:
> 
> The spin locks case such a bottleneck since I'm using multiple
> streams in my performance test. RSS mechanism scattered the streams
> between multiple RX rings while each RX ring is bound to a different
> cup.
> The describe scenario cause lock contention between the different RX rings.
> 
> Performance drops from 37.8 Gbits/sec to 32.1 Gbits/sec when spin
> locks are added and goes back to 37.8 Gbits/sec when using
> read/write locks.

And you are time stamping every received packet?

Thanks,
Richard
--
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