From: Michael Buesch <mb@bu3sch.de>
To: Maximilian Engelhardt <maxi@daemonizer.de>
Cc: "linux-kernel" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-wireless" <linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@ghostprotocols.net>,
Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>,
Gary Zambrano <zambrano@broadcom.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: b44: regression in 2.6.22 (resend)
Date: Sun, 27 May 2007 21:45:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200705272145.00796.mb@bu3sch.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200705272125.25506.maxi@daemonizer.de>
On Sunday 27 May 2007 21:25:17 Maximilian Engelhardt wrote:
> 2.6.22-rc3:
>
> [ 5] local 192.168.1.2 port 46557 connected with 192.168.1.1 port 5001
> [ 5] 0.0-60.4 sec 58.9 MBytes 8.18 Mbits/sec
> [ 4] local 192.168.1.2 port 5001 connected with 192.168.1.1 port 51633
> [ 4] 0.0-63.1 sec 7.27 MBytes 967 Kbits/sec
Why do we have two different measurements here? Is one TX and one RX?
Which one?
> koala:~# ping -c10 192.168.1.1
> PING 192.168.1.1 (192.168.1.1) 56(84) bytes of data.
> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.243 ms
> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.234 ms
> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.238 ms
> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.235 ms
> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.230 ms
> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=0.317 ms
> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=7 ttl=64 time=0.232 ms
> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=8 ttl=64 time=0.232 ms
> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=9 ttl=64 time=0.228 ms
> 64 bytes from 192.168.1.1: icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=0.238 ms
>
> --- 192.168.1.1 ping statistics ---
> 10 packets transmitted, 10 received, 0% packet loss, time 8997ms
> rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.228/0.242/0.317/0.031 ms
>
> System responsiveness was the same as with 2.6.21.1.
>
> wget got 11.23M/s, again same as 2.6.21.1.
>
>
> 2.6.22-rc2-mm1:
>
> [ 5] local 192.168.1.2 port 42198 connected with 192.168.1.1 port 5001
> [ 5] 0.0-60.1 sec 402 MBytes 56.1 Mbits/sec
> [ 4] local 192.168.1.2 port 5001 connected with 192.168.1.1 port 48598
> [ 4] 0.0-63.0 sec 177 MBytes 23.6 Mbits/sec
So with -mm (with ssb) you actually get better performace
then with plain 2.6.22-rc3?
Can you elaborate a bit more about what you get an what you expect
on which kernel?
--
Greetings Michael.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-05-27 19:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20070525172431.60affaca@freepuppy>
[not found] ` <200705261901.18110.mb@bu3sch.de>
2007-05-27 19:25 ` b44: regression in 2.6.22 (resend) Maximilian Engelhardt
2007-05-27 19:45 ` Michael Buesch [this message]
2007-05-27 20:36 ` Maximilian Engelhardt
2007-05-27 20:46 ` Michael Buesch
2007-05-27 21:46 ` Maximilian Engelhardt
2007-05-27 21:13 ` Michael Buesch
2007-05-27 21:16 ` Michael Buesch
2007-05-27 21:50 ` Maximilian Engelhardt
2007-05-27 22:15 ` Maximilian Engelhardt
2007-05-28 0:24 ` Michael Buesch
2007-05-28 0:40 ` Maximilian Engelhardt
2007-05-28 10:16 ` Michael Buesch
2007-05-28 14:09 ` Maximilian Engelhardt
2007-05-28 15:14 ` Michael Buesch
2007-05-28 15:32 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-05-28 15:43 ` Michael Buesch
2007-05-28 17:44 ` Maximilian Engelhardt
2007-05-28 19:23 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-05-28 20:55 ` Maximilian Engelhardt
2007-05-28 21:45 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-05-29 18:28 ` Maximilian Engelhardt
2007-05-29 13:58 ` Gary Zambrano
2007-05-29 17:23 ` Maximilian Engelhardt
2007-06-03 16:26 ` Maximilian Engelhardt
2007-06-04 6:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-06-04 16:09 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-06-04 16:35 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-06-04 16:59 ` iperf: performance regression (was b44 driver problem?) Stephen Hemminger
2007-06-04 17:32 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-06-04 17:51 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-06-04 19:00 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-06-04 19:26 ` Thomas Gleixner
2007-06-04 19:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2007-06-04 19:47 ` Maximilian Engelhardt
2007-06-04 20:02 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-06-04 20:52 ` Maximilian Engelhardt
2007-05-28 10:49 ` b44: regression in 2.6.22 (resend) Michael Buesch
2007-05-28 14:12 ` Maximilian Engelhardt
2007-05-28 14:55 ` Michael Buesch
2007-05-29 14:14 ` Gary Zambrano
2007-05-29 20:45 ` Michael Buesch
2007-05-29 21:01 ` Stephen Hemminger
2007-05-29 21:05 ` Gary Zambrano
2007-05-29 22:39 ` Jeff Garzik
2007-05-29 21:36 ` Gary Zambrano
2007-05-30 10:45 ` Michael Buesch
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=200705272145.00796.mb@bu3sch.de \
--to=mb@bu3sch.de \
--cc=acme@ghostprotocols.net \
--cc=akpm@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=jgarzik@pobox.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=maxi@daemonizer.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shemminger@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=zambrano@broadcom.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).