[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52BBE84C.1030702@mellanox.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Dec 2013 10:26:52 +0200
From: Hadar Hen Zion <hadarh@...lanox.com>
To: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.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" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"tomk@...advisors.com" <tomk@...advisors.com>,
Shawn Bohrer <sbohrer@...advisors.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] mlx4_en: Add PTP hardware clock
On 12/25/2013 1:53 PM, Richard Cochran wrote:
> 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
>
Yes, current implementation time stamping every received packet.
I do think time stamping only packets from the relevant socket will make
more sense but SIOCSHWTSTAMP ioctl provides only the device without any
socket attributes.
Thanks,
Hadar
--
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