From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bin Ren Subject: Re: [PATCH] Network Checksum Removal Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 23:05:51 +0100 Message-ID: <8ae78025050523150564d465e2@mail.gmail.com> References: <20050520233015.GA26305@us.ibm.com> <8ae780250505231255a0cea3b@mail.gmail.com> <3781733093cae2d97c7358f29073f250@cl.cam.ac.uk> <200505231658.46965.jdmason@us.ibm.com> Reply-To: bin.ren@cl.cam.ac.uk Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: In-Reply-To: <200505231658.46965.jdmason@us.ibm.com> Content-Disposition: inline List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com Errors-To: xen-devel-bounces@lists.xensource.com To: Jon Mason Cc: Andrew Theurer , xen-devel@lists.xensource.com List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org On 5/23/05, Jon Mason wrote: > I get the following domU->dom0 throughput on my system (using netperf3 > TCP_STREAM testcase): > tx on ~1580Mbps > tx off ~1230Mbps >=20 > with my previous patch (on Friday's build), I was seeing the following: > with patch ~1610Mbps > no patch ~1100Mbps I suppose you are running dom0 and dom1 on different CPUs. Is it possible for you to pin them to the same CPU and get the numbers again? It'll show how much overhead context switches and CPU share halved could incur. Thanks a lot, Bin > The slight difference between the two might be caused by the changes that= were > incorporated in xen between those dates. If you think it is worth the ti= me, > I can back port the latest patch to Friday's build to see if that makes a > difference. >=20 > Thanks, > Jon >=20 >=20 > _______________________________________________ > Xen-devel mailing list > Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel >