netdev - Re: Performance regression on kernels 3.10 and newer

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

Message-ID: <1408049162.6804.36.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date:	Thu, 14 Aug 2014 13:46:02 -0700
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Rick Jones <rick.jones2@...com>
Cc:	Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Performance regression on kernels 3.10 and newer

On Thu, 2014-08-14 at 12:59 -0700, Rick Jones wrote:

> Presumably, the -T $i,$j option in Alex's netperf command lines will 
> have bound netperf and netserver to a specific CPU where they will have 
> remained.

Thats the problem.

Softirq are receiving packets from other cpus. (RX queue X is handling
packets and one cpu is generally draining RX queue X and feed stack with
packets)

With RFS, RX path of IP and TCP stack would been handled by cpu Y (where
user thread is bound)



--
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