| To: | jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5 |
| From: | Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 3 Oct 2001 10:34:23 +0200 (CEST) |
| Cc: | <linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Robert Olsson <Robert.Olsson@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@xxxxxxxxxx>, <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Simon Kirby <sim@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <Pine.GSO.4.30.0110021739160.2323-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Reply-to: | <mingo@xxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, 2 Oct 2001, jamal wrote:
> [...] please have the courtesy of at least posting results/numbers of
> how this improved things and under what workloads and conditions.
> [...]
500 MHz PIII UP server, 433 MHz client over a single 100 mbit ethernet
using Simon Kirby's udpspam tool to overload the server. Result: 2.4.10
locks up before the patch. 2.4.10 with the first generation irqrate patch
applied protects against the lockup (if max_rate is correct), but results
in dropped packets. The auto-tuning+polling patch results in a working
system and working network, no lockup and no dropped packets. Why this
happened and how it happened has been discussed extensively.
(the effect of polling-driven networking is just an extra and unintended
bonus side-effect.)
Ingo
|
| Previous by Date: | Re: [patch] netconsole-2.4.10-C2, Randy.Dunlap |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5, Ingo Molnar |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5, jamal |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [announce] [patch] limiting IRQ load, irq-rewrite-2.4.11-B5, jamal |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |