From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer Subject: Re: CPU scheduler to TXQ binding? (ixgbe vs. igb) Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 20:57:25 +0200 Message-ID: <20140918205725.64ddd4a7@redhat.com> References: <20140917152653.1c824a22@redhat.com> <1410964359.7106.229.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <5419A1E7.8040109@intel.com> <20140918085640.0815df6d@redhat.com> <1411047209.7106.255.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <1411047689.7106.258.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <1411054951.7106.272.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <20140918175910.5fc67efa@redhat.com> <1411058064.7106.277.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Alexander Duyck , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , Tom Herbert To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:5535 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753874AbaIRS5d (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Sep 2014 14:57:33 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1411058064.7106.277.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 09:34:24 -0700 Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Thu, 2014-09-18 at 17:59 +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: > > On Thu, 18 Sep 2014 08:42:31 -0700 > > Eric Dumazet wrote: > > [...] > > I'm looking for some 1G hardware without multiqueue, so I can get > > around this measurement constraint. And possibly turning it down to > > 100Mbit/s, so I can more easily measure the HoL blocking effect. > > > > ethtool -L eth0 rx 1 tx 1 > > (Or similar if combined is used) Thanks! - that solves my qdisc measurement problem :-) And yes, I had to use: ethtool -L eth1 combined 1 -- Best regards, Jesper Dangaard Brouer MSc.CS, Sr. Network Kernel Developer at Red Hat Author of http://www.iptv-analyzer.org LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer