| To: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Route cache performance under stress |
| From: | Jamal Hadi <hadi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 9 Jun 2003 09:22:11 -0400 (EDT) |
| Cc: | xerox@xxxxxxxxxx, sim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, fw@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20030609.053218.54202815.davem@redhat.com> |
| References: | <20030609072227.R34462@shell.cyberus.ca> <20030609.045547.91327851.davem@redhat.com> <20030609080430.I34540@shell.cyberus.ca> <20030609.053218.54202815.davem@redhat.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Mon, 9 Jun 2003, David S. Miller wrote: > From: Jamal Hadi <hadi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Mon, 9 Jun 2003 08:18:50 -0400 (EDT) > > I found in my tests with a ethernet driver that prefetching the > _next_ dma descriptor gave better numbers than prefetching the > current one but i didnt spend too much time. > > Two issues: > > 1) We have some cycles to borrow for head entry, we can make > prefetch right before rcu_read_lock() > > 2) Ideally, hash chains will not exceed 1 (2 at the max) > entries. > I dont think youll see much benefit with 1 or 2 entries. I was thinking more along the lines of people with over 100K entries total; Let me run with this and get back to you. cheers, jamal |
| Previous by Date: | RE: Route cache performance under stress, Ralph Doncaster |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, David S. Miller |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Route cache performance under stress, David S. Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |