From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Dumazet Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] rfs: Receive Flow Steering Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 23:12:38 +0200 Message-ID: <1271452358.16881.4486.camel@edumazet-laptop> References: <20100415.233334.242114544.davem@davemloft.net> <1271401007.16881.3762.camel@edumazet-laptop> <1271443994.16881.4249.camel@edumazet-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Tom Herbert Return-path: Received: from mail-bw0-f225.google.com ([209.85.218.225]:57644 "EHLO mail-bw0-f225.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757887Ab0DPVMm (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 Apr 2010 17:12:42 -0400 Received: by bwz25 with SMTP id 25so3639754bwz.28 for ; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 14:12:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Le vendredi 16 avril 2010 =C3=A0 13:42 -0700, Tom Herbert a =C3=A9crit = : > On Fri, Apr 16, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > Le vendredi 16 avril 2010 =C3=A0 11:35 -0700, Tom Herbert a =C3=A9c= rit : > >> Results with "tbench 16" on an 8 core Intel machine. > >> > >> No RPS/RFS: 2155 MB/sec > >> RPS (0ff mask): 1700 MB/sec > >> RFS: 1097 > >> >=20 > Blah, I mistakingly reported that... should have been: >=20 > No RPS/RFS: 2155 MB/sec > RPS (0ff mask): 1097 MB/sec > RFS: 1700 MB/sec >=20 > Sorry about that! > This was my expectation too, and what my "corrected" numbers show :-) > But, I take it this is different in your results? My results are on a "tbench 16" on an dual X5570 @ 2.93GHz. (16 logical cpus) No RPS , no RFS : 4448.14 MB/sec=20 RPS : 2298.00 MB/sec (but lot of variation) RFS : 2600 MB/sec Maybe my RFS setup is bad ? (8192 flows)