From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Wed, 8 May 2002 04:22:00 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Wed, 8 May 2002 04:21:59 -0400 Received: from pizda.ninka.net ([216.101.162.242]:36262 "EHLO pizda.ninka.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Wed, 8 May 2002 04:21:59 -0400 Date: Wed, 08 May 2002 01:10:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <20020508.011008.107273722.davem@redhat.com> To: dipankar@in.ibm.com Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] lockfree rtcache lookup using RCU From: "David S. Miller" In-Reply-To: <20020508125711.B10505@in.ibm.com> X-Mailer: Mew version 2.1 on Emacs 21.1 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Dipankar Sarma Date: Wed, 8 May 2002 12:57:11 +0530 For 1 to 8 CPUs I used the test script to send a fixed number of packets to a single destination address. The results show that time needed for lookup continuously increases for 2.5.3 wherease for rt_rcu-2.5.3, it remains constant. How does it perform for a write-heavy workload such as a massive route flap? Both are equally important. Also, workload for single destination isn't all that interesting since such a workload isn't all that common except in benchmarking.