From: Danial Thom <danial_thom@yahoo.com>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.12 Performance problems
Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2005 09:57:22 -0700 (PDT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20050821165723.5531.qmail@web33304.mail.mud.yahoo.com> (raw)
--- Jesper Juhl <jesper.juhl@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/21/05, Danial Thom <danial_thom@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > I just started fiddling with 2.6.12, and
> there
> > seems to be a big drop-off in performance
> from
> > 2.4.x in terms of networking on a
> uniprocessor
> > system. Just bridging packets through the
> > machine, 2.6.12 starts dropping packets at
> > ~100Kpps, whereas 2.4.x doesn't start
> dropping
> > until over 350Kpps on the same hardware
> (2.0Ghz
> > Opteron with e1000 driver). This is pitiful
> > prformance for this hardware. I've
> > increased the rx ring in the e1000 driver to
> 512
> > with little change (interrupt moderation is
> set
> > to 8000 Ints/second). Has "tuning" for MP
> > destroyed UP performance altogether, or is
> there
> > some tuning parameter that could make a
> 4-fold
> > difference? All debugging is off and there
> are
> > no messages on the console or in the error
> logs.
> > The kernel is the standard kernel.org dowload
> > config with SMP turned off and the intel
> ethernet
> > card drivers as modules without any other
> > changes, which is exactly the config for my
> 2.4
> > kernels.
> >
>
> If you have preemtion enabled you could disable
> it. Low latency comes
> at the cost of decreased throughput - can't
> have both. Also try using
> a HZ of 100 if you are currently using 1000,
> that should also improve
> throughput a little at the cost of slightly
> higher latencies.
>
> I doubt that it'll do any huge difference, but
> if it does, then that
> would probably be valuable info.
>
Ok, well you'll have to explain this one:
"Low latency comes at the cost of decreased
throughput - can't have both"
Seems to be a bit backwards. Threading the kernel
adds latency, so its the additional latency in
the kernel that causes the drop in throughput. Do
you mean that kernel performance has been
sacrificed in order to be able to service other
threads more quickly, even when there are no
other threads to be serviced?
Danial
____________________________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - make it your home page
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
next reply other threads:[~2005-08-21 21:42 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 46+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-08-21 16:57 Danial Thom [this message]
2005-08-23 7:12 ` Helge Hafting
2005-08-23 17:10 ` Danial Thom
2005-08-23 17:21 ` Patrick McHardy
2005-08-24 16:24 ` Danial Thom
2005-08-24 16:35 ` Jesper Juhl
2005-08-24 17:26 ` Danial Thom
2005-08-25 4:51 ` Ben Greear
2005-08-25 6:08 ` Danial Thom
2005-08-25 6:15 ` Ben Greear
2005-08-26 3:29 ` Danial Thom
2005-08-26 22:18 ` Danial Thom
2005-08-25 6:34 ` Ben Greear
2005-08-25 14:26 ` Danial Thom
2005-08-25 16:55 ` Ben Greear
2005-08-25 20:45 ` Danial Thom
2005-08-26 19:10 ` Benjamin LaHaise
2005-08-27 11:19 ` Vladimir B. Savkin
2005-08-27 14:35 ` Danial Thom
2005-08-23 18:02 ` Sven-Thorsten Dietrich
2005-08-23 20:10 ` Danial Thom
2005-08-23 20:22 ` Sven-Thorsten Dietrich
2005-08-24 16:33 ` Danial Thom
2005-08-23 20:40 ` Patrick McHardy
2005-08-23 23:29 ` Ben Greear
2005-08-24 16:39 ` Danial Thom
2005-08-23 21:32 ` Jesper Juhl
2005-08-24 17:03 ` Danial Thom
[not found] <2230.192.167.206.189.1124721719.squirrel@new.host.name>
2005-08-22 15:41 ` Danial Thom
2005-08-26 13:17 ` Adrian Bunk
2005-08-26 15:34 ` Danial Thom
2005-08-26 16:21 ` Adrian Bunk
2005-08-26 17:06 ` Danial Thom
2005-08-26 18:30 ` Adrian Bunk
2005-08-26 21:09 ` Danial Thom
2005-08-26 23:27 ` Ben Greear
2005-08-27 14:44 ` Danial Thom
[not found] <9a87484905082111205d27c1aa@mail.gmail.com>
2005-08-21 20:21 ` Danial Thom
2005-08-21 21:21 ` Jesper Juhl
2005-08-22 11:46 ` Denis Vlasenko
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-08-21 17:07 Danial Thom
2005-08-21 15:46 Danial Thom
2005-08-21 16:15 ` Patrick McHardy
2005-08-21 16:18 ` Danial Thom
2005-08-21 16:36 ` Patrick McHardy
2005-08-21 19:47 ` Andrew Morton
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=20050821165723.5531.qmail@web33304.mail.mud.yahoo.com \
--to=danial_thom@yahoo.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@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
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®