Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 16:25:46 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 16:25:46 -0500 Received: from navgwout.symantec.com ([198.6.49.12]:27560 "EHLO navgwout.symantec.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 6 Jan 2003 16:25:43 -0500 To: Anton Blanchard Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Gigabit/SMP performance problem MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.9a January 7, 2002 Message-ID: From: "Avery Fay" Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 15:38:42 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on USCU-SMTPOB01-1/GLOBE-ADMIN/SYMANTEC(Release 5.0.11 |July 24, 2002) at 01/06/2003 12:48:41 PM, Serialize complete at 01/06/2003 12:48:41 PM Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1867 Lines: 57 Hmm. That paper is actually very interesting. I'm thinking maybe with the P4 I'm better off with only 1 cpu. WRT hyperthreading, I actually disabled it because it make performance worse (wasn't clear in the original email). Avery Fay Anton Blanchard 01/03/2003 10:33 PM To: Avery Fay cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Gigabit/SMP performance problem > I'm working with a dual xeon platform with 4 dual e1000 cards on different > pci-x buses. I'm having trouble getting better performance with the second > cpu enabled (ht disabled). With a UP kernel (redhat's 2.4.18), I can route > about 2.9 gigabits/s at around 90% cpu utilization. With a SMP kernel > (redhat's 2.4.18), I can route about 2.8 gigabits/s with both cpus at > around 90% utilization. This suggests to me that the network code is > serialized. I would expect one of two things from my understanding of the > 2.4.x networking improvements (softirqs allowing execution on more than > one cpu): The Fujitsu guys have a nice summary of this: http://www.labs.fujitsu.com/en/techinfo/linux/lse-0211/index.html Skip forward to page 8. Dont blame the networking code just yet :) Notice how worse UP vs SMP performance is on the P4 compared to the P3? This brings up another point, is a single CPU with hyperthreading worth it? As Rusty will tell you, you need to compare it with a UP kernel since it avoids all the locking overhead. I suspect for a lot of cases HT will be a loss (imagine your case, comparing UP and one CPU HT) Anton - 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/