From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Martin J. Bligh" Subject: Re: Early SPECWeb99 results on 2.5.33 with TSO on e1000 Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2002 09:29:50 -0700 Sender: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com Message-ID: <53430559.1031304588@[10.10.2.3]> References: <3D78C9BD.5080905@us.ibm.com> Reply-To: "Martin J. Bligh" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "David S. Miller" , hadi@cyberus.ca, tcw@tempest.prismnet.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com, Nivedita Singhvi Return-path: To: Dave Hansen In-Reply-To: <3D78C9BD.5080905@us.ibm.com> Content-Disposition: inline Errors-to: netdev-bounce@oss.sgi.com List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org > I thought that I already tried to explain this to you. (although > it could have been on one of those too-much-coffee-days :) You told me, but I'm far from convinced this is the problem. I think it's more likely this is a side-effect of a server issue - something like a lot of dropped packets and retransmits, though not necessarily that. > Something strange happens to the clients when NAPI is enabled on > the Specweb clients. Somehow the start using a lot more CPU. > The increased idle time on the server is because the _clients_ are > CPU maxed. I have some preliminary oprofile data for the clients, > but it appears that this is another case of Specweb code just > really sucking. Hmmm ... if you change something on the server, and all the clients go wild, I'm suspicious of whatever you did to the server. You need to have a lot more data before leaping to the conclusion that it's because the specweb client code is crap. Troy - I think your UP clients weren't anywhere near maxed out on CPU power, right? Can you take a peek at the clients under NAPI load? Dave - did you ever try running 4 specweb clients bound to each of the 4 CPUs in an attempt to make the clients scale better? I'm suspicious that you're maxing out 4 4-way machines, and Troy's 16 UPs are cruising along just fine. M.