Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 10:54:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 10:54:46 -0400 Received: from e21.nc.us.ibm.com ([32.97.136.227]:14492 "EHLO e21.nc.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id convert rfc822-to-8bit; Tue, 10 Sep 2002 10:54:44 -0400 Subject: Early SPECWeb99 results on 2.5.33 with TSO on e1000 To: inux-net@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.7 March 21, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Mala Anand" Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2002 09:59:27 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D03NM123/03/M/IBM(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 09/10/2002 08:59:27 AM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2507 Lines: 71 I am resending this note with the subject heading, so that it can be viewed through the subject catagory. ?>?"David S. Miller" wrote: >> NAPI is also not the panacea to all problems in the world. ???>Mala did some testing on this a couple of weeks back. It appears that ???>NAPI damaged performance significantly. >http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/linuxperf/netperf/results/july_02/netperf2.5.25results.htm >Unfortunately it is not listed what e1000 and core NAPI >patch was used. Also, not listed, are the RX/TX mitigation >and ring sizes given to the kernel module upon loading. The default driver that is included in 2.5.25 kernel for Intel gigabit adapter was used for the baseline test and the NAPI driver was downloaded from Robert Olsson's website. I have updated my web page to include Robert's patch. However it is given there for reference purpose only. Except for the ones mentioned explicitly the rest of the configurable values used are default. The default for RX/TX mitigation is 64 microseconds and the default ring size is 80. I have added statistics collected during the test to my web site. I do want to analyze and understand how NAPI can be improved in my tcp_stream test. Last year around November, when I first tested NAPI, I did find NAPI results better than the baseline using udp_stream. However I am concentrating on tcp_stream since that is where NAPI can be improved in my setup. I will update the website as I do more work on this. >Robert can comment on optimal settings I saw Robert's postings. Looks like he may have a more recent version of NAPI driver than the one I used. I also see 2.5.33 has NAPI, I will move to 2.5.33 and continue my work on that. >Robert and Jamal can make a more detailed analysis of Mala's >graphs than I. Jamal has questioned about socket buffer size that I used, I have tried 132k socket buffer size in the past and I didn't see much difference in my tests. I will add that to my list again. Regards, Mala Mala Anand IBM Linux Technology Center - Kernel Performance E-mail:manand@us.ibm.com http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/linuxperf http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/projects/linuxperf Phone:838-8088; Tie-line:678-8088 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/