All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Elad Lahav <elahav@uwaterloo.ca>
To: "Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>
Cc: e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	Elad Lahav <elad_lahav@users.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: Performance degradration 2.6.25->2.6.26
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 10:58:37 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <48CA839D.308@uwaterloo.ca> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.WNT.1.10.0808080906590.5428@jbrandeb-MOBL1.amr.corp.intel.com>

>> HyperThreading, for a total of 4 logical processors, and 4 Intel Gigabit
>>   NICs on a PCI 64/66 bus (82546EB). In the experiments, I am pinning
>> four sending processes (one per NIC) to logical processors 0 and 2, and
>> the NIC interrupts to logical processors 1 and 3, such that interrupts
>> are serviced by the sibling logical processor of the one sending the
>> packets. I have used both the driver that comes with the Linux kernel
>> (7.3.20-k2-NAPI), as well as a more recent one (7.6.15.5).

I believe I have found the problem, and it has nothing to do with the driver.
Up to the latest kernel, logical processors on the same chip had sequential CPU IDs. So 
CPU 0 and CPU 1 were two logical processors on the first physical one, 2 and 3 on the 
second physical one, etc.
It seems that now this ordering has changed. I was running my experiments on logical 
processors 0 and 2, assuming they were on different physical processors, when, in fact, 
they were sharing the same one. When pinning the processes to logical processor 0 and 1, I 
get at least as good a performance as I do on previous kernels.

Thanks,
Elad


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/

      parent reply	other threads:[~2008-09-12 14:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <489C0F2C.9040101@users.sourceforge.net>
2008-08-08 16:23 ` Performance degradration 2.6.25->2.6.26 Brandeburg, Jesse
2008-08-10  8:27   ` Elad Lahav
2008-08-10  9:05   ` Elad Lahav
2008-09-12 14:58   ` Elad Lahav [this message]

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=48CA839D.308@uwaterloo.ca \
    --to=elahav@uwaterloo.ca \
    --cc=e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=elad_lahav@users.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
    --cc=netdev@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.