From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
To: Robert Hancock <robert.hancock@calian.com>
Cc: "radheys@xilinx.com" <radheys@xilinx.com>,
"linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>,
"michals@xilinx.com" <michals@xilinx.com>,
"pabeni@redhat.com" <pabeni@redhat.com>,
"edumazet@google.com" <edumazet@google.com>,
"harinik@xilinx.com" <harinik@xilinx.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: axienet: Use NAPI for TX completion path
Date: Thu, 5 May 2022 11:08:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20220505110817.74938ad8@kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5376cbf00c18487b7b96d72396807ab195f53ddc.camel@calian.com>
On Thu, 5 May 2022 17:33:39 +0000 Robert Hancock wrote:
> On Wed, 2022-05-04 at 19:20 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Mon, 2 May 2022 19:30:51 +0000 Radhey Shyam Pandey wrote:
> > > Thanks for the patch. I assume for simulating heavy network load we
> > > are using netperf/iperf. Do we have some details on the benchmark
> > > before and after adding TX NAPI? I want to see the impact on
> > > throughput.
> >
> > Seems like a reasonable ask, let's get the patch reposted
> > with the numbers in the commit message.
>
> Didn't mean to ignore that request, looks like I didn't get Radhey's email
> directly, odd.
>
> I did a test with iperf3 from the board (Xilinx MPSoC ZU9EG platform) connected
> to a Linux PC via a switch at 1G link speed. With TX NAPI in place I saw about
> 942 Mbps for TX rate, with the previous code I saw 941 Mbps. RX speed was also
> unchanged at 941 Mbps. So no real significant change either way. I can spin
> another version of the patch that includes these numbers.
Sounds like line rate, is there a difference in CPU utilization?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-05-05 18:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-04-29 22:28 [PATCH net-next] net: axienet: Use NAPI for TX completion path Robert Hancock
2022-05-02 19:30 ` Radhey Shyam Pandey
2022-05-05 2:20 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-05-05 17:33 ` Robert Hancock
2022-05-05 18:08 ` Jakub Kicinski [this message]
2022-05-05 18:56 ` Robert Hancock
2022-05-05 20:15 ` Robert Hancock
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=20220505110817.74938ad8@kernel.org \
--to=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=harinik@xilinx.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=michals@xilinx.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=radheys@xilinx.com \
--cc=robert.hancock@calian.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).