From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jamal Subject: Re: [PATCH v6] net: batch skb dequeueing from softnet input_pkt_queue Date: Mon, 03 May 2010 16:15:31 -0400 Message-ID: <1272917731.3926.12.camel@bigi> References: <20100429214144.GA10663@gargoyle.fritz.box> <20100430.163857.180417789.davem@davemloft.net> <20100501110000.GB9434@gargoyle.fritz.box> <1272783366.2173.13.camel@edumazet-laptop> <20100502092020.GA9655@gargoyle.fritz.box> <1272797690.2173.26.camel@edumazet-laptop> <20100502154649.GA18063@gargoyle.fritz.box> <1272818131.2173.127.camel@edumazet-laptop> <20100502212550.GA2673@gargoyle.fritz.box> <1272836755.2173.153.camel@edumazet-laptop> <20100502215450.GC2673@gargoyle.fritz.box> <1272838104.2173.166.camel@edumazet-laptop> Reply-To: hadi@cyberus.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Andi Kleen , David Miller , xiaosuo@gmail.com, therbert@google.com, shemminger@vyatta.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, lenb@kernel.org, arjan@infradead.org To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from mail-pz0-f204.google.com ([209.85.222.204]:52840 "EHLO mail-pz0-f204.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756535Ab0ECUPh (ORCPT ); Mon, 3 May 2010 16:15:37 -0400 Received: by pzk42 with SMTP id 42so347077pzk.4 for ; Mon, 03 May 2010 13:15:36 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1272838104.2173.166.camel@edumazet-laptop> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, 2010-05-03 at 00:08 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > Test I did this week with Jamal. > > We first set a "ee" rps mask, because all NIC interrupts were handled by > CPU0, and Jamal thought like you, that not using cpu4 would give better > performance. > > But using "fe" mask gave me a bonus, from ~700.000 pps to ~800.000 pps > I am seeing the opposite with my machine (Nehalem): with ee i get 99.4% and fe i get 94.2% whereas non-rps is about 98.1%. cheers, jamal PS:- sorry dont have time to collect a lot more data - tommorow i could do more.