From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BCA4C433F5 for ; Thu, 5 May 2022 18:08:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1354855AbiEESMB (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 May 2022 14:12:01 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:57894 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229815AbiEESMA (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 May 2022 14:12:00 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0AFCF554B3 for ; Thu, 5 May 2022 11:08:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 616D961F1F for ; Thu, 5 May 2022 18:08:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6763DC385A4; Thu, 5 May 2022 18:08:19 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1651774099; bh=o1D9W3mV4nlOFvs/Rd77CWl4QI0upM7ggMCpojlvSas=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=n0GdqlXT8vlY/pkauwl80J2AMHZrHfcndVEYOFcMNzQSFAR1t640sY7vJ/O2TWfli GcroCF6NRbx2cE2vmB/vFx7rzdGGZCRSw+ME71ZPjL6sz45KgGjU4G06KrEE7cefpH y3/KuvUSWpkfrGdVfszh6GHmUPlJGg+VEdhoSeH0MjzTtTokn4+RTbSRqH955VPqvC 3I2YmXHfRdb6wnuC2gDVr8sX4kleDPo+4MEV10NQgSZtSG7zaNp1NmFX6M4Pii7XPA xJLeGk+gtfbRq6yeDGIV89ulTbC7u/cjS/jVWa0gWUMh2RLRlW1IHtGhlVe7ptp35w G36YhscgVHIBw== Date: Thu, 5 May 2022 11:08:17 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Robert Hancock Cc: "radheys@xilinx.com" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "davem@davemloft.net" , "michals@xilinx.com" , "pabeni@redhat.com" , "edumazet@google.com" , "harinik@xilinx.com" Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: axienet: Use NAPI for TX completion path Message-ID: <20220505110817.74938ad8@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <5376cbf00c18487b7b96d72396807ab195f53ddc.camel@calian.com> References: <20220429222835.3641895-1-robert.hancock@calian.com> <20220504192028.2f7d10fb@kernel.org> <5376cbf00c18487b7b96d72396807ab195f53ddc.camel@calian.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org 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?