| To: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>, haveblue@xxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Early SPECWeb99 results on 2.5.33 with TSO on e1000 |
| From: | "Martin J. Bligh" <Martin.Bligh@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 06 Sep 2002 11:45:17 -0700 |
| Cc: | ak@xxxxxxx, hadi@xxxxxxxxxx, tcw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, niv@xxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20020906.113652.40767574.davem@redhat.com> |
| References: | <20020906.113652.40767574.davem@redhat.com> |
| Reply-to: | "Martin J. Bligh" <Martin.Bligh@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
> Actually, oprofile separated out the acenic module from the rest of the > kernel. I should have included that breakout as well. but it was only 1.3 > of CPU: > 1.3801 0.0000 /lib/modules/2.4.18+O1/kernel/drivers/net/acenic.o > > We thought you were using e1000 in these tests? e1000 on the server, those profiles were client side. M. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: Early SPECWeb99 results on 2.5.33 with TSO on e1000, David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Early SPECWeb99 results on 2.5.33 with TSO on e1000, Andi Kleen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: Early SPECWeb99 results on 2.5.33 with TSO on e1000, David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Early SPECWeb99 results on 2.5.33 with TSO on e1000, David S. Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |