netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Brian Bloniarz <bmb@athenacr.com>
To: Tom Herbert <therbert@google.com>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Very low latency TCP for clusters
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 2010 08:57:38 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4C459D42.2060402@athenacr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTillCVWMHHBImGEeRYy2MJYqtGIvSPvacLKJnpP2@mail.gmail.com>

Tom Herbert wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Le lundi 19 juillet 2010 à 11:44 -0700, Tom Herbert a écrit :
>>
>>> I see about 7 usecs as best number on loopback, so I believe this is
>>> in the ballpark.  As I mentioned above, this about "best case" latency
>>> of a single thread, so we assume any amount of pinning or other
>>> customized configuration to that purpose.
>> Well, given I get 29 us on a ping between two machines (Gb link, no
>> process involved on receiver, only softirq), I really doubt we can reach
>> 5 us on a tcp test involving a user process on both side ;)
>>
> That's pretty pokey ;-) I see numbers around 25 usecs between to
> machines, this is with TCP_NBRR.  With TCP_RR it's more like 35 usecs,
> so eliminating the scheduler is already a big reduction.  That leaves
> 18 usecs in device time, interrupt processing, network, and cache
> misses; 7 usecs in TCP processing, user space.  While 5 usecs is an
> aggressive goal, I am not ready to concede that there's an
> architectural limit in either NICs, TCP, or sockets that can't be
> overcome.

Have you toyed with the NIC's interrupt coalescing yet?
I'm wondering if any part of the 25usecs is that.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2010-07-20 12:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-07-19 17:05 Very low latency TCP for clusters Tom Herbert
2010-07-19 17:35 ` David Miller
2010-07-19 17:41 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-07-19 18:44   ` Tom Herbert
2010-07-19 19:27     ` David Miller
2010-07-19 22:03     ` Eric Dumazet
2010-07-19 23:37       ` Tom Herbert
2010-07-20  5:26         ` Eric Dumazet
2010-07-20 17:24           ` Rick Jones
2010-07-20 12:57         ` Brian Bloniarz [this message]
2010-07-19 18:13 ` Rick Jones
2010-07-19 18:28 ` Nivedita Singhvi
2010-07-19 19:46 ` Mitchell Erblich
2010-07-19 21:16   ` Tom Herbert

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=4C459D42.2060402@athenacr.com \
    --to=bmb@athenacr.com \
    --cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=therbert@google.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).