From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
To: ghaskins@novell.com
Cc: vernux@us.ibm.com, andi@firstfloor.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org,
pmullaney@novell.com
Subject: Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 13:52:43 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20090319.135243.51567158.davem@davemloft.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49C23DB9.6000905@novell.com>
From: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 2009 08:42:33 -0400
> David Miller wrote:
> > From: Gregory Haskins <ghaskins@novell.com>
> > Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 23:48:46 -0400
> >
> >
> >> To see this in action, try taking a moderately large smp system
> >> (8-way+) and scaling the number of flows.
> >>
> >
> > I can maintain line-rate over 10GB with a 64-cpu box.
> Oh man, I am jealous of that 64-way :)
>
> How many simultaneous flows? What hardware? What qdisc and other
> config do you use? MTU? I cannot replicate such results on 10GB even
> with much smaller cpu counts.
Sun Neptune NIU 10G with 24 TX queues.
And it's all because of the number of TX queues, nothing more.
It is essential for good performance with any level of cpu
arity.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-19 20:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 40+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-18 17:24 High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock Vernon Mauery
2009-03-18 19:07 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-18 20:17 ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-20 23:29 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-03-23 8:32 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-23 8:37 ` David Miller
2009-03-23 8:50 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-04-02 14:13 ` Herbert Xu
2009-04-02 14:15 ` Herbert Xu
2009-03-18 20:54 ` Andi Kleen
2009-03-18 21:03 ` David Miller
2009-03-18 21:10 ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-18 21:38 ` David Miller
2009-03-18 21:49 ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-19 1:02 ` David Miller
2009-03-18 21:54 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-03-19 1:03 ` David Miller
2009-03-19 1:13 ` Sven-Thorsten Dietrich
2009-03-19 1:17 ` David Miller
2009-03-19 1:43 ` Sven-Thorsten Dietrich
2009-03-19 1:54 ` David Miller
2009-03-19 5:49 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-19 5:58 ` David Miller
2009-03-19 14:04 ` [PATCH] net: reorder struct Qdisc for better SMP performance Eric Dumazet
2009-03-20 8:33 ` David Miller
2009-03-19 13:45 ` High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock Andi Kleen
2009-03-19 3:48 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-03-19 5:38 ` David Miller
2009-03-19 12:42 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-03-19 20:52 ` David Miller [this message]
2009-03-19 12:50 ` Peter W. Morreale
2009-03-19 7:15 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-03-18 21:07 ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-18 21:45 ` Eilon Greenstein
2009-03-18 21:51 ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-18 21:59 ` Andi Kleen
2009-03-18 22:19 ` Rick Jones
2009-03-19 12:59 ` Peter W. Morreale
2009-03-19 13:36 ` Peter W. Morreale
2009-03-19 13:46 ` Andi Kleen
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=20090319.135243.51567158.davem@davemloft.net \
--to=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=ghaskins@novell.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pmullaney@novell.com \
--cc=vernux@us.ibm.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).