Re: [RFC] netif_rx: receive path optimization

[Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>]

>> I "never" see that because I always bind a NIC to a specific CPU :)  
>> Just about every networking-intensive benchmark report I've seen has 
>> done the same.
> 
> 
> Just a reminder that the networking-benchmark world and
> the real networking deployment world have a less than desirable
> intersection (which I know you know only too well, Rick ;)).

Touche :)

> How often do people use affinity? How often do they really tune
> the system for their workloads? 

Not as often as they should.

 > How often do they turn off things like SACK etc?

Well, I'm in an email discussion with someone who seems to bump their TCP 
windows quite large, and disable timestamps...

> Not very often in the real world. Designing OSs to
> do better at benchmarks is a different proposition than designing
> OSs to do well in the real world.

BTW what is the real world purpose of having the multiple CPU affinity of NIC 
interrupts?  I have to admit it seems rather alien to me.  (In the context of no 
onboard NIC smarts being involved that is)

>>> Note Linux is quiet resilient to reordering compared to other OSes (as
>>> you may know) but avoiding this is a better approach - hence my
>>> suggestion to use NAPI when you want to do serious TCP.
> 
> 
> The real killer for TCP is triggering fast retransmit
> unnecessarily

Agreed.  That is doubleplusungood.

rick