From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rick Jones Subject: Re: e1000 (?) jumbo frames performance issue Date: Fri, 06 May 2005 09:18:59 -0700 Message-ID: <427B98F3.1020003@hp.com> References: <200505051928.32496.m.iatrou@freemail.gr> <427A7F5B.8050704@hp.com> <200505060055.55778.m.iatrou@freemail.gr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com Return-path: To: Michael Iatrou In-Reply-To: <200505060055.55778.m.iatrou@freemail.gr> Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org > >>It might be good to add CPU utilization figures - for 2.3pl1 that means >>editing the makefile to add a -DUSE_PROC_STAT and recompiling. Or you can >>grab netperf 2.4.0-rc3 from: >> >>ftp://ftp.cup.hp.com/dist/networking/benchmarks/netperf/experimental/ >> >>if you cannot find it elsewhere, and that will (try to) compile-in the >>right CPU utilization mechanism automagically. > > > I already did a custom CPU usage instrumentation (based on infos > from /proc/stat -- the latest netperf does the same thing, doesn't it?) and > it seems that system has plenty of idle time (up to 50% if I recall correct) IIRC you stated that the boxes were UP? If changing netperf settings didn't affect much, then kernel profiles and/or packet traces may be in order. rick