From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
Cc: "Michal Kubeček" <mkubecek@suse.cz>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org,
"John A. Sullivan III" <jsullivan@opensourcedevel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC] SFQ planned changes
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 09:17:25 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1325665045.30256.28.camel@edumazet-laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw6g1se3pfC8qzvDKnp9N8x0wRhdBActr0Og8rHaHvdAMQ@mail.gmail.com>
Le mercredi 04 janvier 2012 à 08:56 +0100, Dave Taht a écrit :
> I find puzzling that my baseline ping time is nearly 3x yours.
>
> I guess this is the price I pay for a 680mhz box on the other end.
>
Hmm... maybe... but this seems strange. A ping handler should be a
matter of 1 to 10 us at most. not 100 us.
Checkout on receiver machine rx coalescing params : ethtool -c eth0
Here : the sender is a normal link (not trunk mode)
# ethtool -c eth3
Coalesce parameters for eth3:
Adaptive RX: off TX: off
stats-block-usecs: 0
sample-interval: 0
pkt-rate-low: 0
pkt-rate-high: 0
rx-usecs: 24
rx-frames: 0
rx-usecs-irq: 0
rx-frames-irq: 0
tx-usecs: 48
tx-frames: 0
tx-usecs-irq: 0
tx-frames-irq: 0
And on my 2nd server, receiver of the ping request, (but also 2 switches
are crossed between these machines). This eth2 is part of a bond0
device, and trunk (vlan) activated on this link.
$ ethtool -c eth2
Coalesce parameters for eth2:
Adaptive RX: off TX: off
stats-block-usecs: 0
sample-interval: 0
pkt-rate-low: 0
pkt-rate-high: 0
rx-usecs: 20
rx-frames: 5
rx-usecs-irq: 0
rx-frames-irq: 5
tx-usecs: 72
tx-frames: 53
tx-usecs-irq: 0
tx-frames-irq: 5
So I have a 20us delay at rx time before NIC sends an interrupt to the
Host to 'deliver' the incoming packet.
If I change it to 1 us :
ethtool -C eth2 rx-usecs 1
then pings are even better, but a given load should generate more
interrupts.
# ping 192.168.20.110
PING 192.168.20.110 (192.168.20.110) 56(84) bytes of data.
64 bytes from 192.168.20.110: icmp_req=1 ttl=64 time=0.067 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.20.110: icmp_req=2 ttl=64 time=0.061 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.20.110: icmp_req=3 ttl=64 time=0.064 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.20.110: icmp_req=4 ttl=64 time=0.064 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.20.110: icmp_req=5 ttl=64 time=0.061 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.20.110: icmp_req=6 ttl=64 time=0.061 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.20.110: icmp_req=7 ttl=64 time=0.062 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.20.110: icmp_req=8 ttl=64 time=0.060 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.20.110: icmp_req=9 ttl=64 time=0.062 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.20.110: icmp_req=10 ttl=64 time=0.062 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.20.110: icmp_req=11 ttl=64 time=0.062 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.20.110: icmp_req=12 ttl=64 time=0.062 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.20.110: icmp_req=13 ttl=64 time=0.058 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.20.110: icmp_req=14 ttl=64 time=0.062 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.20.110: icmp_req=15 ttl=64 time=0.063 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.20.110: icmp_req=16 ttl=64 time=0.063 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.20.110: icmp_req=17 ttl=64 time=0.059 ms
64 bytes from 192.168.20.110: icmp_req=18 ttl=64 time=0.062 ms
^C
--- 192.168.20.110 ping statistics ---
18 packets transmitted, 18 received, 0% packet loss, time 16999ms
rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.058/0.061/0.067/0.010 ms
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-04 8:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-01 2:30 tc filter mask for ACK packets off? John A. Sullivan III
2012-01-03 7:31 ` Michal Kubeček
2012-01-03 9:36 ` Dave Taht
2012-01-03 10:40 ` [RFC] SFQ planned changes Eric Dumazet
2012-01-03 12:07 ` Dave Taht
2012-01-03 12:50 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-01-03 16:08 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-01-03 23:57 ` Dave Taht
2012-01-04 0:14 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-01-04 7:56 ` Dave Taht
2012-01-04 8:17 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2012-01-03 12:18 ` tc filter mask for ACK packets off? John A. Sullivan III
2012-01-03 12:32 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-01-03 12:45 ` John A. Sullivan III
2012-01-03 13:00 ` Dave Taht
2012-01-03 17:57 ` John A. Sullivan III
2012-01-04 0:01 ` Michal Soltys
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=1325665045.30256.28.camel@edumazet-laptop \
--to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=dave.taht@gmail.com \
--cc=jsullivan@opensourcedevel.com \
--cc=mkubecek@suse.cz \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/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