| To: | P@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch |
| From: | jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 22 Jun 2005 15:37:46 -0400 |
| Cc: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, gandalf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, shemminger@xxxxxxxx, mitch.a.williams@xxxxxxxxx, john.ronciak@xxxxxxxxx, mchan@xxxxxxxxxxxx, buytenh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, jdmason@xxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx, ganesh.venkatesan@xxxxxxxxx, jesse.brandeburg@xxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <42B92490.40005@draigBrady.com> |
| Organization: | unknown |
| References: | <42A5284C.3060808@osdl.org> <1118147904.6320.108.camel@localhost.localdomain> <Pine.LNX.4.58.0506071351080.16594@tux.rsn.bth.se> <20050621.133704.08321534.davem@davemloft.net> <42B92490.40005@draigBrady.com> |
| Reply-to: | hadi@xxxxxxxxxx |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Wed, 2005-22-06 at 09:42 +0100, P@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > Yes the copy is essentially free here as the data is already cached. > > As a data point, I went the whole hog and used buffer recycling > in my essentially packet sniffing application. I.E. there are no > allocs per packet at all, and this make a HUGE difference. On a > 2x3.4GHz 2xe1000 system I can receive 620Kpps per port sustained > into my userspace app which does a LOT of processing per packet. > Without the buffer recycling is was around 250Kpps. > Note I don't reuse an skb until the packet is copied into a > PACKET_MMAP buffer. Was this machine SMP? NAPI involved? I take it nothing interfering in the middle with the headers? cheers, jamal |
| Previous by Date: | Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch, Andi Kleen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [TG3]: About hw coalescing infrastructure., Michael Chan |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch, P |
| Next by Thread: | Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch, P |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |