| To: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] TSO Reloaded |
| From: | John Heffner <jheffner@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 17 May 2005 22:51:53 -0400 |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20050517.192829.71087792.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20050504230731.12be1bc3.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <46332e5aa197db91aaf012cf140282b4@xxxxxxx> <20050517.192829.71087792.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On May 17, 2005, at 10:28 PM, David S. Miller wrote: From: John Heffner <jheffner@xxxxxxx> Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 22:26:09 -0400Though it may be moot by now, I just ran some tests of my own with thispatch. This was on a dual 2.4 GHz Xeon booted with a UP kernel,running iperf over an e1000 at a 1500 byte MTU. I measured idle CPU by running a process which sits in a gettimeofday() loop. Numbers are CPUutilization, all turned out +/- 1%. No TSO: 86.6% Old TSO: 61.0% New TSO: 88.5%Yeah, TSO Reloaded really stinks. :-) Try the "Super TSO" patch I just posted instead. Interesting timing. :) With the new patch I'm getting 78.0%. -John |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] TSO Reloaded, David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] NUMA aware allocation of transmit and receive buffers for e1000, Christoph Lameter |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] TSO Reloaded, David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] TSO Reloaded, David S. Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |