From: Manfred Spraul <manfred@colorfullife.com>
To: netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Info: NAPI performance at "low" loads
Date: Tue, 17 Sep 2002 21:54:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3D878877.9050303@colorfullife.com> (raw)
NAPI network drivers mask the rx interrupts in their interrupt handler,
and reenable them in dev->poll(). In the worst case, that happens for
every packet. I've tried to measure the overhead of that operation.
The cpu time needed to recieve 50k packets/sec:
without NAPI: 53.7 %
with NAPI: 59.9 %
50k packets/sec is the limit for NAPI, at higher packet rates the forced
mitigation kicks in and every interrupt recieves more than one packet.
The cpu time was measured by busy-looping in user space, the numbers
should be accurate to less than 1 %.
Summary: with my setup, the overhead is around 11 %.
Could someone try to reproduce my results?
Sender:
# sendpkt <target ip> 1 <10..50, go get a good packet rate>
Receiver:
$ loadtest
Please disable any interrupt mitigation features of your nic, otherwise
the mitigation will dramatically change the needed cpu time.
The sender sends ICMP echo reply packets, evenly spaced by
"memset(,,n*512)" between the syscalls.
The cpu load was measured with a user space app that calls
"memset(,,16384)" in a tight loop, and reports the number of loops per
second.
I've used a patched tulip driver, the current NAPI driver contains a
loop that severely slows down the nic under such loads.
The patch and my test apps are at
http://www.q-ag.de/~manfred/loadtest
hardware setup:
Duron 700, VIA KT 133
no IO APIC, i.e. slow 8259 XT PIC.
Accton tulip clone, ADMtek comet.
crossover cable
Sender: Celeron 1.13 GHz, rtl8139
--
Manfred
next reply other threads:[~2002-09-17 19:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-09-17 19:54 Manfred Spraul [this message]
[not found] <3D879F59.6BDF9443@digeo.com>
[not found] ` <20020917.142635.114214508.davem@redhat.com>
2002-09-17 21:45 ` Info: NAPI performance at "low" loads Andrew Morton
2002-09-17 21:39 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-17 21:54 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-09-17 21:49 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-18 2:11 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-09-18 2:06 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-18 2:36 ` Jeff Garzik
2002-09-17 21:58 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-18 0:57 ` jamal
2002-09-18 1:00 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-18 2:16 ` Andrew Morton
2002-09-18 17:27 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-09-18 17:50 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-19 14:58 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-09-18 20:23 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-18 20:43 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-18 20:46 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-18 21:15 ` Alan Cox
2002-09-18 21:22 ` David S. Miller
2002-09-19 15:03 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-09-19 15:53 ` Alan Cox
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=3D878877.9050303@colorfullife.com \
--to=manfred@colorfullife.com \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.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).