From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC VLAN 00/10]: VLAN netlink support try 2
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 20:28:39 +0200
Message-ID: <4665AB57.7030605@trash.net>
References: <20070605143650.23717.91261.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain> <46658E84.1090301@candelatech.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
To: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:35200 "EHLO
	stinky.trash.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1753819AbXFES2q (ORCPT
	<rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Tue, 5 Jun 2007 14:28:46 -0400
In-Reply-To: <46658E84.1090301@candelatech.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

Ben Greear wrote:
> Patrick McHardy wrote:
> 
>> The last VLAN patchset was outdated, sorry about the mixup. These are the
>> correct patches. The iproute patch I posted was correct, so no repost of
>> that one.
>>
>>   
> 
> Is there any significant performance penalty in creating VLANs using
> these patches?
> 
> If you have a test station handy, could you let us know what 'time'
> shows for a script
> creating 4000 VLANs with the old vconfig/ioctl method v/s this new method?


Not significantly more, for 1000 VLANs I get:

ip link add:

real    0m22.836s
user    0m0.100s
sys     0m5.850s

vconfig add:

real    0m19.739s
user    0m0.090s
sys     0m3.600s


ip -b (batch add):

real    0m5.239s
user    0m0.280s
sys     0m3.480s

> I'll try to look through the rest of the patches in detail later today.

Thanks.