All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org>
To: Avery Fay <avery_fay@symantec.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Gigabit/SMP performance problem
Date: Sat, 4 Jan 2003 14:33:45 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20030104033345.GC19888@krispykreme> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <OFC4D9AF0E.DA93F4D7-ON85256CA3.0058C567-85256CA3.00592873@symantec.com>

 
> 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

  parent reply	other threads:[~2003-01-04  3:29 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2003-01-03 16:12 Gigabit/SMP performance problem Avery Fay
2003-01-03 18:05 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-01-03 21:49   ` Ron cooper
2003-01-03 21:47     ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-01-03 21:20 ` Robert Olsson
2003-01-04  3:33 ` Anton Blanchard [this message]
2003-01-06 19:43 ` Jon Fraser
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2003-01-03 20:25 Avery Fay
2003-01-03 21:19 ` Arjan van de Ven
2003-01-03 21:36 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-01-03 22:31   ` Andrew Theurer
     [not found] <b8ce5e32.0301040439.7bdaa903@posting.google.com>
2003-01-06 18:27 ` Bill Davidsen
2003-01-06 19:09   ` Daniel Blueman
2003-01-06 19:26     ` Brian Tinsley
2003-01-06 20:25 Avery Fay
2003-01-06 20:29 Avery Fay
2003-01-06 21:23 ` Martin J. Bligh
2003-01-07 17:19   ` Mike Black
2003-01-06 20:33 Avery Fay
2003-01-06 20:38 Avery Fay
2003-01-07 18:15 ` Robert Olsson
2003-01-08 12:17 Jon Burgess
2003-01-08 21:12 Feldman, Scott
2003-01-08 21:44 Ronciak, John
2003-01-09 12:49 ` Robert Olsson

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=20030104033345.GC19888@krispykreme \
    --to=anton@samba.org \
    --cc=avery_fay@symantec.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    /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.