netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
To: Mitch Williams <mitch.a.williams@intel.com>
Cc: "Ronciak, John" <john.ronciak@intel.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	mchan@broadcom.com, hadi@cyberus.ca, buytenh@wantstofly.org,
	jdmason@us.ibm.com, shemminger@osdl.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com,
	Robert.Olsson@data.slu.se, "Venkatesan,
	Ganesh" <ganesh.venkatesan@intel.com>,
	"Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>
Subject: Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch
Date: Mon, 06 Jun 2005 17:08:57 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <42A4E599.2090604@candelatech.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.CYG.4.58.0506061647340.128@mawilli1-desk2.amr.corp.intel.com>

Mitch Williams wrote:
> 
> On Mon, 6 Jun 2005, Ronciak, John wrote:
> 
> 
>>>	If you force the e1000 driver to do RX replenishment every N
>>>	packets it should reduce the packet drops the same (in the
>>>	single NIC case) as if you reduced the dev->weight to that
>>>	same value N.
>>
>>But this isn't what we are seeing.  Even if we just reduce the weight
>>value to 32 from 64, all of the drops go away.  So there seems to be
>>other things affecting this.
> 
> 
> Some quickie results for everybody -- I've been working on other stuff this
> morning and haven't had much time in the lab.
> 
> Increasing the RX ring to 512 descriptors eliminates dropped packets, but
> performance goes down.  When I mentioned this, John and Jesse both nodded
> and said, "Yep.  That's what happens when the descriptor ring grows past
> one page."
> 
> Reducing the weight to 32 got rid of almost all of the dropped packets
> (down to < 1 per second); reducing it to 20 eliminated all of them.  In
> both cases performance rose as compared to the default weight of 64.
> 
> Tests were run on 2.6.12rc5 on a dual Xeon 2.8GHz PCI-X system.  We run
> Chariot for performance testing, using TCP/IP large file transfers with 10
> Windows 2000 clients.

So is the Linux server reading/writing these large files to/from the disk?

Can you tell us how much performance went down when you increased the
descriptors to 512?

Thanks,
Ben


-- 
Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Candela Technologies Inc  http://www.candelatech.com

  reply	other threads:[~2005-06-07  0:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 121+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2005-06-06 20:29 RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch Ronciak, John
2005-06-06 23:55 ` Mitch Williams
2005-06-07  0:08   ` Ben Greear [this message]
2005-06-08  1:50     ` Jesse Brandeburg
2005-06-07  4:53   ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-06-07 12:38     ` jamal
2005-06-07 12:06       ` Martin Josefsson
2005-06-07 13:29         ` jamal
2005-06-07 12:36           ` Martin Josefsson
2005-06-07 16:34             ` Robert Olsson
2005-06-07 23:19               ` Rick Jones
2005-06-21 20:37         ` David S. Miller
2005-06-22  7:27           ` Eric Dumazet
2005-06-22  8:42           ` P
2005-06-22 19:37             ` jamal
2005-06-23  8:56               ` P
2005-06-21 20:20     ` David S. Miller
2005-06-21 20:38       ` Rick Jones
2005-06-21 20:55         ` David S. Miller
2005-06-21 21:47         ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-21 22:22           ` Donald Becker
2005-06-21 22:34             ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-22  0:08               ` Donald Becker
2005-06-22  4:44                 ` Chris Friesen
2005-06-22 11:31                   ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-22 16:23                 ` Leonid Grossman
2005-06-22 16:37                   ` jamal
2005-06-22 18:00                     ` Leonid Grossman
2005-06-22 18:06                       ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-22 20:22                         ` David S. Miller
2005-06-22 20:35                           ` Rick Jones
2005-06-22 20:43                             ` David S. Miller
2005-06-22 21:10                           ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-22 21:16                             ` David S. Miller
2005-06-22 21:53                             ` Chris Friesen
2005-06-22 22:11                               ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-22 21:38                           ` Eric Dumazet
2005-06-22 22:13                             ` Eric Dumazet
2005-06-22 22:30                               ` David S. Miller
2005-06-22 22:23                             ` David S. Miller
2005-06-23 12:14                               ` jamal
2005-06-23 17:36                                 ` David Mosberger
2005-06-22 22:42                           ` Leonid Grossman
2005-06-22 23:13                             ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-22 23:19                               ` David S. Miller
2005-06-22 23:23                                 ` Andi Kleen
2005-06-22 17:05                   ` Andi Kleen
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-06-07 16:23 Ronciak, John
2005-06-07 20:21 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-08  2:20   ` Jesse Brandeburg
2005-06-08  3:31     ` David S. Miller
2005-06-08  3:43     ` David S. Miller
2005-06-08 13:36       ` jamal
2005-06-09 21:37         ` Jesse Brandeburg
2005-06-09 22:05           ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-06-09 22:12             ` Jesse Brandeburg
2005-06-09 22:21               ` David S. Miller
2005-06-09 22:21               ` jamal
2005-06-09 22:22             ` David S. Miller
2005-06-09 22:20           ` jamal
2005-06-06 15:35 Ronciak, John
2005-06-06 19:47 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 18:19 Ronciak, John
2005-06-03 18:33 ` Ben Greear
2005-06-03 18:49   ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 18:59     ` Ben Greear
2005-06-03 19:02       ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 20:17 ` Robert Olsson
2005-06-03 20:30   ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 17:40 Ronciak, John
2005-06-03 18:08 ` Robert Olsson
2005-06-03  0:11 Ronciak, John
2005-06-03  0:18 ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03  2:32   ` jamal
2005-06-03 17:43     ` Mitch Williams
2005-06-03 18:38       ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 18:42       ` jamal
2005-06-03 19:01         ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 19:28           ` Mitch Williams
2005-06-03 19:59             ` jamal
2005-06-03 20:31               ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 21:12                 ` Jon Mason
2005-06-03 20:22             ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 20:29               ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 19:49                 ` Michael Chan
2005-06-03 20:59                   ` Lennert Buytenhek
2005-06-03 20:35                     ` Michael Chan
2005-06-03 22:29                       ` jamal
2005-06-04  0:25                         ` Michael Chan
2005-06-05 21:36                           ` David S. Miller
2005-06-06  6:43                             ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 23:26                       ` Lennert Buytenhek
2005-06-05 20:11                       ` David S. Miller
2005-06-03 21:07                     ` Edgar E Iglesias
2005-06-03 23:30                       ` Lennert Buytenhek
2005-06-03 20:30             ` Ben Greear
2005-06-03 19:40           ` jamal
2005-06-03 20:23             ` jamal
2005-06-03 20:28               ` Mitch Williams
2005-06-02 21:19 Ronciak, John
2005-06-02 21:31 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-06-02 21:40   ` David S. Miller
2005-06-02 21:51   ` Jon Mason
2005-06-02 22:12     ` David S. Miller
2005-06-02 22:19       ` Jon Mason
2005-06-02 22:15     ` Robert Olsson
2005-05-26 21:36 Mitch Williams
2005-05-27  8:21 ` Robert Olsson
2005-05-27 11:18 ` jamal
2005-05-27 15:50 ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-05-27 20:27   ` Mitch Williams
2005-05-27 21:01     ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-05-28  0:56       ` jamal
2005-05-31 17:35         ` Mitch Williams
2005-05-31 17:40           ` Stephen Hemminger
2005-05-31 17:43             ` Mitch Williams
2005-05-31 22:07           ` Jon Mason
2005-05-31 22:14             ` David S. Miller
2005-05-31 23:28               ` Jon Mason
2005-06-02 12:26                 ` jamal
2005-06-02 17:30                   ` Stephen Hemminger

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=42A4E599.2090604@candelatech.com \
    --to=greearb@candelatech.com \
    --cc=Robert.Olsson@data.slu.se \
    --cc=buytenh@wantstofly.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=ganesh.venkatesan@intel.com \
    --cc=hadi@cyberus.ca \
    --cc=jdmason@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
    --cc=john.ronciak@intel.com \
    --cc=mchan@broadcom.com \
    --cc=mitch.a.williams@intel.com \
    --cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
    --cc=shemminger@osdl.org \
    /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).