From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
To: Linas Vepstas <linas@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Thomas Klein <tklein@de.ibm.com>,
Jan-Bernd Themann <themann@de.ibm.com>,
Stefan Roscher <stefan.roscher@de.ibm.com>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Christoph Raisch <raisch@de.ibm.com>,
linux-ppc <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>,
Jan-Bernd Themann <ossthema@de.ibm.com>, Eder <meder@de.ibm.com>,
akepner@sgi.com,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation.org>,
Marcus@ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: RFC: issues concerning the next NAPI interface
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 10:07:53 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46CF1069.7090406@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070824165110.GH4282@austin.ibm.com>
> Just to be clear, in the previous email I posted on this thread, I
> described a worst-case network ping-pong test case (send a packet, wait
> for reply), and found out that a deffered interrupt scheme just damaged
> the performance of the test case. Since the folks who came up with the
> test case were adamant, I turned off the defferred interrupts.
> While defferred interrupts are an "obvious" solution, I decided that
> they weren't a good solution. (And I have no other solution to offer).
Sounds exactly like the default netperf TCP_RR test and any number of other
benchmarks. The "send a request, wait for reply, send next request, etc etc
etc" is a rather common application behaviour afterall.
rick jones
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
To: Linas Vepstas <linas@austin.ibm.com>
Cc: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation.org>,
Jan-Bernd Themann <ossthema@de.ibm.com>,
Thomas Klein <tklein@de.ibm.com>,
Marcus@ozlabs.org, Jan-Bernd Themann <themann@de.ibm.com>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Christoph Raisch <raisch@de.ibm.com>,
linux-ppc <linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org>,
akepner@sgi.com, Eder <meder@de.ibm.com>,
Stefan Roscher <stefan.roscher@de.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: issues concerning the next NAPI interface
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 10:07:53 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46CF1069.7090406@hp.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20070824165110.GH4282@austin.ibm.com>
> Just to be clear, in the previous email I posted on this thread, I
> described a worst-case network ping-pong test case (send a packet, wait
> for reply), and found out that a deffered interrupt scheme just damaged
> the performance of the test case. Since the folks who came up with the
> test case were adamant, I turned off the defferred interrupts.
> While defferred interrupts are an "obvious" solution, I decided that
> they weren't a good solution. (And I have no other solution to offer).
Sounds exactly like the default netperf TCP_RR test and any number of other
benchmarks. The "send a request, wait for reply, send next request, etc etc
etc" is a rather common application behaviour afterall.
rick jones
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-08-24 17:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 94+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-08-24 13:59 RFC: issues concerning the next NAPI interface Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-24 13:59 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-24 15:37 ` akepner
2007-08-24 15:37 ` akepner
2007-08-24 15:47 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-24 15:47 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-24 15:52 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-08-24 15:52 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-08-24 16:50 ` David Stevens
2007-08-24 16:50 ` David Stevens
2007-08-24 21:44 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 21:44 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 21:51 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-24 21:51 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-24 16:51 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-24 16:51 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-24 17:07 ` Rick Jones [this message]
2007-08-24 17:07 ` Rick Jones
2007-08-24 17:45 ` Shirley Ma
2007-08-24 17:45 ` Shirley Ma
2007-08-24 17:16 ` James Chapman
2007-08-24 17:16 ` James Chapman
2007-08-24 18:11 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-24 18:11 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-24 21:47 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 21:47 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 22:06 ` akepner
2007-08-24 22:06 ` akepner
2007-08-26 19:36 ` James Chapman
2007-08-26 19:36 ` James Chapman
2007-08-27 1:58 ` David Miller
2007-08-27 1:58 ` David Miller
2007-08-27 9:47 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-27 9:47 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-27 20:37 ` David Miller
2007-08-27 20:37 ` David Miller
2007-08-28 11:19 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-28 11:19 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-28 20:21 ` David Miller
2007-08-28 20:21 ` David Miller
2007-08-29 7:10 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-29 7:10 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-29 8:15 ` James Chapman
2007-08-29 8:15 ` James Chapman
2007-08-29 8:43 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-29 8:43 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-29 8:29 ` David Miller
2007-08-29 8:29 ` David Miller
2007-08-29 8:31 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-29 8:31 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-27 15:51 ` James Chapman
2007-08-27 15:51 ` James Chapman
2007-08-27 16:02 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-27 16:02 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-27 17:05 ` James Chapman
2007-08-27 17:05 ` James Chapman
2007-08-27 21:02 ` David Miller
2007-08-27 21:02 ` David Miller
2007-08-27 21:41 ` James Chapman
2007-08-27 21:41 ` James Chapman
2007-08-27 21:56 ` David Miller
2007-08-27 21:56 ` David Miller
2007-08-28 9:22 ` James Chapman
2007-08-28 9:22 ` James Chapman
2007-08-28 11:48 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-28 11:48 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-28 12:16 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2007-08-28 12:16 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2007-08-28 14:55 ` James Chapman
2007-08-28 14:55 ` James Chapman
2007-08-28 11:21 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-28 11:21 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-28 20:25 ` David Miller
2007-08-28 20:25 ` David Miller
2007-08-28 20:27 ` David Miller
2007-08-28 20:27 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 16:45 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-24 16:45 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-24 21:43 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 21:43 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 21:32 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 21:32 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 21:37 ` David Miller
2007-08-24 21:37 ` David Miller
[not found] <8VHRR-45R-17@gated-at.bofh.it>
[not found] ` <8VKwj-8ke-27@gated-at.bofh.it>
2007-08-24 19:04 ` Bodo Eggert
2007-08-24 19:04 ` Bodo Eggert
2007-08-24 20:42 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-24 20:42 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-24 21:11 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-24 21:11 ` Jan-Bernd Themann
2007-08-24 21:35 ` Linas Vepstas
2007-08-24 21:35 ` Linas Vepstas
[not found] ` <E1IOeSm-0000bm-Jo__24045.532072387$1187982363$gmane$org@be1.lrz>
2007-08-24 20:24 ` Stephen Hemminger
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-08-25 2:10 Mitchell Erblich
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=46CF1069.7090406@hp.com \
--to=rick.jones2@hp.com \
--cc=Marcus@ozlabs.org \
--cc=akepner@sgi.com \
--cc=linas@austin.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=meder@de.ibm.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ossthema@de.ibm.com \
--cc=raisch@de.ibm.com \
--cc=shemminger@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=stefan.roscher@de.ibm.com \
--cc=themann@de.ibm.com \
--cc=tklein@de.ibm.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.