Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 23 Aug 2002 08:53:31 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 23 Aug 2002 08:53:31 -0400 Received: from e35.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.133]:60316 "EHLO e35.co.us.ibm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 23 Aug 2002 08:53:28 -0400 Subject: Re: netperf3 results on 2.5.25 kernel To: Eric Lemoine Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, lse-tech@lists.sourceforge.net, lse-tech-admin@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 5.0.7 March 21, 2001 Message-ID: From: "Mala Anand" Date: Fri, 23 Aug 2002 07:56:49 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D03NM123/03/M/IBM(Release 5.0.10 |March 22, 2002) at 08/23/2002 06:56:50 AM MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1134 Lines: 37 Eric wrote... >> I did a comparison test on 2.4.17, 2.5.25 stock kernels and on 2.5.25 >> with NAPI enabled e1000 driver using netperf3, tcp_stream 1 adapter >> test using UNI kernels. The test setup/results can be found at: >> http://www-124.ibm.com/developerworks/opensource/linuxperf/netperf/results/july_02/netperf2.5.25results.htm >On which machine(s) do you actually test the kernels? Source machine? >Destination machine? Or both? On both the server and the client, I used the respective kernels. However I used the cpu usage from the server since my objective is to stress the server in this test. 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/