netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Poor gige performance with 2.4.20-pre*

To: Richard Gooch <rgooch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Poor gige performance with 2.4.20-pre*
From: Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2002 20:45:10 -0400
Cc: "Xiaoliang (David) Wei" <weixl@xxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200209290634.g8T6Y2o08439@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; from rgooch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx on Sun, Sep 29, 2002 at 12:34:02AM -0600
References: <200209282257.g8SMvta32527@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <002f01c2675d$b642b640$f5f2010a@weixl> <200209290634.g8T6Y2o08439@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
On Sun, Sep 29, 2002 at 12:34:02AM -0600, Richard Gooch wrote:
> This is all on a LAN (of course; expecting good performance from a WAN
> is pretty futile). I use a buffer size of 256 KiB.

From my experience tuning on a 550MHz P3 Xeon, you're better off using a 
buffer size of 8-16KB that stays in the L1 cache.  Of course, that was 
without actually doing anything useful with the data being transferred.  
Gige really does need a faster cpu in the ghz+ range.  As for ns83820, 
it's a work in progress.  Some of the recent bugfixes may have reduced 
performance, so it may need to be retuned.

                -ben
-- 
GMS rules.


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