From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Evgeniy Polyakov Subject: Re: Userspace network stack and netchannels. Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2007 12:53:03 +0400 Message-ID: <20070926085303.GB13187@2ka.mipt.ru> References: <20070925180043.GA16698@2ka.mipt.ru> <7e63f56c0709251220s12ab10b5pade5b2c90fa4a8b9@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Robert Iakobashvili Return-path: Received: from relay.2ka.mipt.ru ([194.85.82.65]:53888 "EHLO 2ka.mipt.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753302AbXIZIxT (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Sep 2007 04:53:19 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7e63f56c0709251220s12ab10b5pade5b2c90fa4a8b9@mail.gmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Hi Robert. On Tue, Sep 25, 2007 at 09:20:44PM +0200, Robert Iakobashvili (coroberti@gmail.com) wrote: > > 3. Gigabit send/recv benchmark for netchannels and sockets using small > > packets. > > http://tservice.net.ru/~s0mbre/blog/devel/networking/2006_10_26.html > > http://tservice.net.ru/~s0mbre/blog/devel/networking/2006_12_21.html > > > > Very interesting. Are there any details of your benchmarking available, > namely, how it was done? > Have you some comparison profiling data (oprofile) to figure out where > the advantages are coming from? Those are throughput tests - one sender, one receiver with different size of the packet being sent/received. CPU usage was determined via /proc statistics. My analysis says that reduced number of syscalls is main improvement factor, but different (non-rfc-compliant) congestion control allows faster start and faster recovery. -- Evgeniy Polyakov