All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Robert Hancock <robert.hancock@calian.com>
Cc: "radheys@xilinx.com" <radheys@xilinx.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"michals@xilinx.com" <michals@xilinx.com>,
	"pabeni@redhat.com" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	"edumazet@google.com" <edumazet@google.com>,
	"harinik@xilinx.com" <harinik@xilinx.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: axienet: Use NAPI for TX completion path
Date: Thu, 5 May 2022 11:08:17 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220505110817.74938ad8@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5376cbf00c18487b7b96d72396807ab195f53ddc.camel@calian.com>

On Thu, 5 May 2022 17:33:39 +0000 Robert Hancock wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 19:20 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Mon, 2 May 2022 19:30:51 +0000 Radhey Shyam Pandey wrote:  
> > > Thanks for the patch. I assume for simulating heavy network load we
> > > are using netperf/iperf. Do we have some details on the benchmark
> > > before and after adding TX NAPI? I want to see the impact on
> > > throughput.  
> > 
> > Seems like a reasonable ask, let's get the patch reposted 
> > with the numbers in the commit message.  
> 
> Didn't mean to ignore that request, looks like I didn't get Radhey's email
> directly, odd.
> 
> I did a test with iperf3 from the board (Xilinx MPSoC ZU9EG platform) connected
> to a Linux PC via a switch at 1G link speed. With TX NAPI in place I saw about
> 942 Mbps for TX rate, with the previous code I saw 941 Mbps. RX speed was also
> unchanged at 941 Mbps. So no real significant change either way. I can spin
> another version of the patch that includes these numbers.

Sounds like line rate, is there a difference in CPU utilization?

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Robert Hancock <robert.hancock@calian.com>
Cc: "radheys@xilinx.com" <radheys@xilinx.com>,
	"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" 
	<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
	"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	"michals@xilinx.com" <michals@xilinx.com>,
	"pabeni@redhat.com" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	"edumazet@google.com" <edumazet@google.com>,
	"harinik@xilinx.com" <harinik@xilinx.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: axienet: Use NAPI for TX completion path
Date: Thu, 5 May 2022 11:08:17 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220505110817.74938ad8@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5376cbf00c18487b7b96d72396807ab195f53ddc.camel@calian.com>

On Thu, 5 May 2022 17:33:39 +0000 Robert Hancock wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 19:20 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Mon, 2 May 2022 19:30:51 +0000 Radhey Shyam Pandey wrote:  
> > > Thanks for the patch. I assume for simulating heavy network load we
> > > are using netperf/iperf. Do we have some details on the benchmark
> > > before and after adding TX NAPI? I want to see the impact on
> > > throughput.  
> > 
> > Seems like a reasonable ask, let's get the patch reposted 
> > with the numbers in the commit message.  
> 
> Didn't mean to ignore that request, looks like I didn't get Radhey's email
> directly, odd.
> 
> I did a test with iperf3 from the board (Xilinx MPSoC ZU9EG platform) connected
> to a Linux PC via a switch at 1G link speed. With TX NAPI in place I saw about
> 942 Mbps for TX rate, with the previous code I saw 941 Mbps. RX speed was also
> unchanged at 941 Mbps. So no real significant change either way. I can spin
> another version of the patch that includes these numbers.

Sounds like line rate, is there a difference in CPU utilization?

  reply	other threads:[~2022-05-05 18:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-04-29 22:28 [PATCH net-next] net: axienet: Use NAPI for TX completion path Robert Hancock
2022-04-29 22:28 ` Robert Hancock
2022-05-02 19:30 ` Radhey Shyam Pandey
2022-05-02 19:30   ` Radhey Shyam Pandey
2022-05-05  2:20   ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-05-05  2:20     ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-05-05 17:33     ` Robert Hancock
2022-05-05 17:33       ` Robert Hancock
2022-05-05 18:08       ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2022-05-05 18:08         ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-05-05 18:56         ` Robert Hancock
2022-05-05 18:56           ` Robert Hancock
2022-05-05 20:15           ` Robert Hancock
2022-05-05 20:15             ` Robert Hancock

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=20220505110817.74938ad8@kernel.org \
    --to=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=harinik@xilinx.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
    --cc=michals@xilinx.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=radheys@xilinx.com \
    --cc=robert.hancock@calian.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.