| To: | Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Route cache performance |
| From: | Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 7 Sep 2005 17:03:17 +0200 |
| Cc: | Simon Kirby <sim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Eric Dumazet <dada1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20050907011959.GA25725@yakov.inr.ac.ru> |
| References: | <43014E27.1070104@cosmosbay.com> <20050823190852.GA20794@netnation.com> <17163.32645.202453.145416@robur.slu.se> <20050824000158.GA8137@netnation.com> <20050825181111.GB14336@netnation.com> <20050825200543.GA6612@yakov.inr.ac.ru> <20050825212211.GA23384@netnation.com> <20050826115520.GA12351@yakov.inr.ac.ru> <17167.29239.469711.847951@robur.slu.se> <20050906235700.GA31820@netnation.com> <20050907011959.GA25725@yakov.inr.ac.ru> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Alexey Kuznetsov writes:
> Robert, have you seen this pehonomenon already? Did you mean that SMP works
> or that it never works (but this patch is valid only for UP)? Did it
> become worse after 2.6.9?
It was quite some time since I saw dst cache overflow and we use 2.6
in infrastructure. Anyway I was able to "tune" route cache so I see
in our lab system on a SMP box. I think UP and SMP behaves the same
but with UP we could disable the deferred delete as Simon tested.
I don't know if anything happen in 2.6.9 I don't think so. But any
improvement in drivers or FIB lookup may increase the burden so we get
overflows.
We had some code that checked the RCU latency.
Cheers.
--ro
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Route cache performance, Robert Olsson |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Route cache performance, Simon Kirby |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Route cache performance, Alexey Kuznetsov |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Route cache performance, Simon Kirby |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |