From: Breno Leitao <leitao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
Cc: "Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
rick.jones2@hp.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: e1000 performance issue in 4 simultaneous links
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:19:41 -0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1200075581.9349.33.camel@cafe> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <47879DE4.8080603@cosmosbay.com>
On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 17:48 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Breno Leitao a écrit :
> > Take a look at the interrupt table this time:
> >
> > io-dolphins:~/leitao # cat /proc/interrupts | grep eth[1]*[67]
> > 277: 15 1362450 13 14 13 14 15 18 XICS Level eth6
> > 278: 12 13 1348681 19 13 15 10 11 XICS Level eth7
> > 323: 11 18 17 1348426 18 11 11 13 XICS Level eth16
> > 324: 12 16 11 19 1402709 13 14 11 XICS Level eth17
> >
> >
> >
> If your machine has 8 cpus, then your vmstat output shows a bottleneck :)
>
> (100/8 = 12.5), so I guess one of your CPU is full
Well, if I run top while running the test, I see this load distributed
among the CPUs, mainly those that had a NIC IRC bonded. Take a look:
Tasks: 133 total, 2 running, 130 sleeping, 0 stopped, 1 zombie
Cpu0 : 0.3%us, 19.5%sy, 0.0%ni, 73.5%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 6.6%st
Cpu1 : 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 75.1%id, 0.0%wa, 0.7%hi, 24.3%si, 0.0%st
Cpu2 : 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 73.1%id, 0.0%wa, 0.7%hi, 26.2%si, 0.0%st
Cpu3 : 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 76.1%id, 0.0%wa, 0.7%hi, 23.3%si, 0.0%st
Cpu4 : 0.0%us, 0.3%sy, 0.0%ni, 70.4%id, 0.7%wa, 0.3%hi, 28.2%si, 0.0%st
Cpu5 : 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni,100.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st
Cpu6 : 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 99.7%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.3%si, 0.0%st
Cpu7 : 0.0%us, 0.0%sy, 0.0%ni,100.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si, 0.0%st
Note that this average scenario doesn't change during the entire
benchmarking test.
Thanks!
--
Breno Leitao <leitao@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-01-11 18:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-01-10 16:17 e1000 performance issue in 4 simultaneous links Breno Leitao
2008-01-10 16:36 ` Ben Hutchings
2008-01-10 16:51 ` Jeba Anandhan
2008-01-10 17:31 ` Breno Leitao
2008-01-10 18:18 ` Kok, Auke
2008-01-10 18:37 ` Rick Jones
2008-01-10 18:26 ` Rick Jones
2008-01-10 20:52 ` Brandeburg, Jesse
2008-01-11 1:28 ` David Miller
2008-01-11 11:09 ` Benny Amorsen
2008-01-12 1:41 ` David Miller
2008-01-12 5:13 ` Denys Fedoryshchenko
2008-01-30 16:57 ` Kok, Auke
2008-01-11 16:20 ` Breno Leitao
2008-01-11 16:48 ` Eric Dumazet
2008-01-11 17:36 ` Denys Fedoryshchenko
2008-01-11 18:45 ` Breno Leitao
2008-01-11 18:19 ` Breno Leitao [this message]
2008-01-11 18:48 ` Rick Jones
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1200075581.9349.33.camel@cafe \
--to=leitao@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rick.jones2@hp.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.