[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Intel and TOE in the news

To: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Intel and TOE in the news
From: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: 21 Feb 2005 10:48:45 -0500
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>, Leonid Grossman <leonid.grossman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, "'rick jones'" <rick.jones2@xxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, "'Alex Aizman'" <alex@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <>
Organization: jamalopolous
References: <> <> <> <> <1108994621.1089.158.camel@jzny.localdomain> <> <1108996313.1090.178.camel@jzny.localdomain> <>
Reply-to: hadi@xxxxxxxxxx
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 2005-02-21 at 10:34, Thomas Graf wrote:
> * jamal <1108996313.1090.178.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2005-02-21 09:31
> > 
> > I have done the experiments and even posted the patches on netdev last
> > year to batch on enqueue. 
> Right, I slightly remember. I have a head like a sieve. Can you
> remmeber the subject of the post? I can't find it in the archive.

I cant remember - patches are on another machine; the last time i posted
was with some folks from .it who were trying to improve routing

> > Infact performance goes down when you batch in some cases depending on
> > the hardware used. My investigation shows that if you have a fast CPU
> > and a fast bus, theres always only one packet in flight within the
> > stack. Batching by definition requires more than one packet.
> Make sense but we probably have multiple packets in the stack if qdiscs are
> involved. 

No - thats the problem. Theres always no more than one packet i.e only
packet in flight except in the case of some hardware - which i pointed
out as problematic in my SUCON presentation.

Maybe i should write a paper about this - i spent christmas collecting a
lot of data using relayfs; 


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>