| To: | P@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Luca Deri's paper: Improving Passive Packet Capture: Beyond Device Polling |
| From: | Luca Deri <deri@xxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 06 Apr 2004 14:25:49 +0200 |
| Cc: | Jason Lunz <lunz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, cpw@xxxxxxxx, ntop-misc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <407286BB.8080107@draigBrady.com> |
| Organization: | ntop.org |
| References: | <20040330142354.GA17671@outblaze.com> <1081033332.2037.61.camel@jzny.localdomain> <c4rvvv$dbf$1@sea.gmane.org> <407286BB.8080107@draigBrady.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7a) Gecko/20040218 |
|
Hi all, the problem with libpcap-mmap is that: - it does not reduce the journey of the packet from NIC to userland beside the last part of it (syscall replaced with mmap). This has a negative impact on the overall performance. - it does not feature things like kernel packet sampling that pushes people to fetch all the packets out of a NIC then discard most of them (i.e. CPU cycles not very well spent). Somehow this is a limitation of pcap that does not feature a pcap_sample call. In addition if you do care about performance, I believe you're willing to turn off packet transmission and only do packet receive. Unfortunately I have no access to a "real" traffic generator (I use a PC as traffic generator). However if you read my paper you can see that with a Pentium IV 1.7 you can capture over 500'000 pkt/sec, so in your setup (Xeon + Spirent) you can have better figures. IRQ: Linux has far too much latency, in particular at high speeds. I'm not the right person who can say "this is the way to go", however I believe that we need some sort of interrupt prioritization like RTIRQ does. FYI, I've just polished the code and added kernel packet filtering to PF_RING. As soon as I have completed my tests I will release a new version. Finally It would be nice to have in the standard Linux core some packet capture improvements. It could either be based on my work or on somebody else's work. It doesn't really matter as long as Linux gets faster. Cheers, Luca
Jason Lunz wrote:
|
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] lmc header file not needed, Jeff Garzik |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] remove magic '31' for netdev priv. alignment, Jeff Garzik |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Luca Deri's paper: Improving Passive Packet Capture: Beyond Device Polling, P |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Luca Deri's paper: Improving Passive Packet Capture: Beyond Device Polling, Jason Lunz |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |