From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Vladimir Ivashchenko Subject: Re: bond + tc regression ? Date: Wed, 6 May 2009 23:47:59 +0300 Message-ID: <20090506204759.GA16681@francoudi.com> References: <1241538358.27647.9.camel@hazard2.francoudi.com> <4A0105A8.3060707@cosmosbay.com> <1241635518.13702.37.camel@hazard2.francoudi.com> <200905062230.04594.denys@visp.net.lb> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Denys Fedoryschenko Return-path: Received: from cerber.thunderworx.net ([217.27.32.18]:3109 "EHLO cerber.thunderworx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752249AbZEFUsB (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 May 2009 16:48:01 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200905062230.04594.denys@visp.net.lb> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, May 06, 2009 at 10:30:04PM +0300, Denys Fedoryschenko wrote: > > What's interesting, the same 850mbps load, identical machine, but with > > only two NICs and no bond, HTB+esfq, kernel 2.6.21.2 => 60% CPU idle. > > 2.5x overhead. > > Probably oprofile can sched some light on this. > On my own experience IRQ balancing hurt performance a lot, because of cache > misses. This is a dual-core machine, isn't cache shared between the cores? Without IRQ balancing, one of the cores goes around 10% idle and HTB doesn't do its job properly. Actually, in my experience HTB stops working properly after idle goes below 35%. I'll try gathering some stats using oprofile. -- Best Regards Vladimir Ivashchenko Chief Technology Officer PrimeTel, Cyprus - www.prime-tel.com