Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751317Ab0LPFAi (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Dec 2010 00:00:38 -0500 Received: from mail-wy0-f174.google.com ([74.125.82.174]:59298 "EHLO mail-wy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750755Ab0LPFAd (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Dec 2010 00:00:33 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date :message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=XLNd16PGaIULxFQ3JNfdUGkcingexzTrUWhIC4UxX41zjsTt4repo2+GgwhyhEI3iX hDCI4wk3GGu1jCLj+JKV/ooHtZe0fdCsWM3MhImK0RJgSD9vjojLQhj4/r8cLdm+0xNl r6C97eS0SuddvQZTr+ui3ZGozsh+XJgcsQfV4= Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Kernel interfaces for multiqueue aware socket From: Eric Dumazet To: Junchang Wang Cc: Fenghua Yu , "David S. Miller" , John Fastabend , Xinan Tang , netdev , linux-kernel In-Reply-To: References: <46a08278c2ba21737528eb4b77391a7e8bc88000.1292405004.git.fenghua.yu@intel.com> <1292446118.2603.11.camel@edumazet-laptop> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Thu, 16 Dec 2010 06:00:27 +0100 Message-ID: <1292475627.2603.39.camel@edumazet-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1339 Lines: 31 Le jeudi 16 décembre 2010 à 09:52 +0800, Junchang Wang a écrit : > On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 4:48 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > >> With this patch, the user-space receiving speed on a Intel SR1690 server with > >> a single L5640 6-core processor and a single ixgbe-based NIC goes from 0.73Mpps > >> to 4.20Mpps, nearly a linear speedup. A Intel SR1625 server two E5530 4-core > >> processors and a single ixgbe-based NIC goes from 0.80Mpps to 4.6Mpps. We noticed > >> the performance penalty comes from NUMA memory allocation. > >> > > > > ??? please elaborate on these NUMA memory allocations. This should be OK > > after commit 564824b0c52c34692d (net: allocate skbs on local node) > > > Hi Eric, > Commit 564824b0c52c34692d had been used in the experiments, but the problem > remained unsolved. > > SLUB was used, and both servers were equipped with 8G physical memory. > Is there any > additional information I can provide? > Yes, sure, you could provide a description of the bench you used, and data you gathered to make the conclusion that NUMA was a problem. -- 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/