From: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
To: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC VLAN 00/10]: VLAN netlink support try 2
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2007 23:12:23 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4665D1B7.5040902@trash.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4665C2CE.4050504@candelatech.com>
Ben Greear wrote:
> Patrick McHardy wrote:
>
>> 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 The last VLAN patchset was outdated, sorry about the mixup.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
>
>
> Thanks for doing the tests. That small performance drop seems
> fine to me.
I'll try to speed it up a bit more, my initial version needed something
like 10s for 1000 VLANs. I suspect the iproute RTM_NEWLINK probing done
for every (non-batched) operation adds quite significantly to the
overhead.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-06-05 21:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-06-05 14:36 [RFC VLAN 00/10]: VLAN netlink support try 2 Patrick McHardy
2007-06-05 14:36 ` [RFC VLAN 01/10]: Fix off-by-ones in VLAN ID checks Patrick McHardy
2007-06-05 16:16 ` Ben Greear
2007-06-05 18:16 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-06-05 14:36 ` [RFC VLAN 02/10]: Convert name-based configuration functions to struct netdevice * Patrick McHardy
2007-06-05 14:36 ` [RFC VLAN 03/10]: Move some device intialization code to dev->init callback Patrick McHardy
2007-06-05 14:36 ` [RFC VLAN 04/10]: Move vlan_group allocation to seperate function Patrick McHardy
2007-06-05 14:36 ` [RFC VLAN 05/10]: Split up device checks Patrick McHardy
2007-06-05 14:36 ` [RFC VLAN 06/10]: Move device registation to seperate function Patrick McHardy
2007-06-05 14:37 ` [RFC VLAN 07/10]: Return proper error codes in register_vlan_device Patrick McHardy
2007-06-05 14:37 ` [RFC VLAN 08/10]: Use 32 bit value for skb->priority mapping Patrick McHardy
2007-06-05 14:37 ` [RFC VLAN 09/10]: Keep track of number of QoS mappings Patrick McHardy
2007-06-05 14:37 ` [RFC VLAN 10/10]: Use rtnl_link API Patrick McHardy
2007-06-05 21:31 ` Ben Greear
2007-06-05 21:58 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-06-05 22:03 ` Ben Greear
2007-06-05 16:25 ` [RFC VLAN 00/10]: VLAN netlink support try 2 Ben Greear
2007-06-05 18:28 ` Patrick McHardy
2007-06-05 20:08 ` Ben Greear
2007-06-05 21:12 ` Patrick McHardy [this message]
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=4665D1B7.5040902@trash.net \
--to=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=greearb@candelatech.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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).