[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1446924959.17135.23.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2015 11:35:59 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Cc: Simon Xiao <sixiao@...rosoft.com>,
"devel@...uxdriverproject.org" <devel@...uxdriverproject.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
KY Srinivasan <kys@...rosoft.com>,
Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@...rosoft.com>
Subject: Re: linux-next network throughput performance regression
On Fri, 2015-11-06 at 14:30 -0700, David Ahern wrote:
> On 11/6/15 2:18 PM, Simon Xiao wrote:
> > The .config file used to build linux-next kernel is attached to this mail.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Failed to notice this on the first response; my brain filled in. Why
> linux-next tree? Can you try net-next which is more relevant for this
> mailing list, post the top commit id and config file used?
Throughput on a single TCP flow for a 40G NIC can be tricky to tune.
Make sure IRQ are properly setup/balanced, as I know that IRQ names were
changed recently and your scripts might have not noticed...
Also "ethtool -c eth0" might show very different interrupt coalescing
params ?
I too have a Mellanox 40Gb in my lab and saw no difference in
performance with recent kernels.
Of course, a simple "perf record -a -g sleep 4 ; perf report" might
point to some obvious issue. Like unexpected segmentation in case of
forwarding...
--
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