netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Early SPECWeb99 results on 2.5.33 with TSO on e1000

To: Dave Hansen <haveblue@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Early SPECWeb99 results on 2.5.33 with TSO on e1000
From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 6 Sep 2002 20:26:46 +0200
Cc: "Martin J. Bligh" <Martin.Bligh@xxxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>, hadi@xxxxxxxxxx, tcw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, Nivedita Singhvi <niv@xxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <3D78E7A5.7050306@us.ibm.com>
References: <3D78C9BD.5080905@us.ibm.com> <53430559.1031304588@[10.10.2.3]> <3D78E7A5.7050306@us.ibm.com>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i
> c0106e59 42693    1.89176     restore_all
> c01dfe68 42787    1.89592     sys_socketcall
> c01df39c 54185    2.40097     sys_bind
> c01de698 62740    2.78005     sockfd_lookup
> c01372c8 97886    4.3374      fput
> c022c110 125306   5.55239     __generic_copy_to_user
> c01373b0 181922   8.06109     fget
> c020958c 199054   8.82022     tcp_v4_get_port
> c0106e10 199934   8.85921     system_call
> c022c158 214014   9.48311     __generic_copy_from_user
> c0216ecc 257768   11.4219     inet_bind

The profile looks bogus. The NIC driver is nowhere in sight. Normally
its mmap IO for interrupts and device registers should show. I would
double check it (e.g. with normal profile) 

In case it is no bogus: 
Most of these are either atomic_inc/dec of reference counters or some
form of lock. The system_call could be the int 0x80 (using the SYSENTER
patches would help), which also does atomic operations implicitely.
restore_all is IRET, could also likely be speed up by using SYSEXIT.

If NAPI hurts here then it surely not because of eating CPU time.

-Andi


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