mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Kernel 2.4 vs 2.6 Traffic Controller performance
Date: Tue, 2 Oct 2007 17:17:57 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071002171757.2e5dbd0b@freepuppy.rosehill> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <9dbec86d0710021705j3a20e411hb3e9b34e622f9a85@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, 3 Oct 2007 08:05:30 +0800
Sonny <smaniaol@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello
> I hope this is the right place to ask this.Does any know if there is a
> substantial difference in the performance of the traffic controller
> between kernel 2.4 and 2.6. We tested it using 1 iperf server and use
> 250 and 500 clients, altering the burst. We use the top command to
> check the idle time of our router to see this. The results we got from
> the 2.4 kernel shows around 65-70% idle time while the 2.6 shows
> 60-65% idle time. We tried to use MRTG and we're not getting any
> results either. We want to know if we could improve the bandwidth by
> upgrading the kernel, else we would have to get a new bandwidth
> manager.  Could anyone have the similar test regarding this. Thanks in
> advance.

Some related thoughts:
1. Make sure you have the iperf yield fix in place. Otherwise iperf eats
   cpu.

2. Proper mailing lists are: netdev@vger.kernel.org and lartc@mailman.ds9a.nl

3. The latest versions of 2.6 use different clock measurement that
should be better than older 2.4 (where there are three choices).
The new clock is finer resolution (at slightly higher overhead), which
should make accuracy higher but might increase cpu usage.

-- 
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@linux-foundation.org>


      reply	other threads:[~2007-10-03  0:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-10-03  0:05 Sonny
2007-10-03  0:17 ` Stephen Hemminger [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=20071002171757.2e5dbd0b@freepuppy.rosehill \
    --to=shemminger@linux-foundation.org \
    --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®