RE: ML405 gigabit ethernet with kernel 2.6.23

Hi,

 

Yes, for 1500 MTU these aren’t too bad.  One thing to note, using the TCP_STREAM option does not take advantage of zero-copy and possibly checksum offload on the transmit side.  You should use the TCP_SENDFILE option for that.  We typically use options such as:

 

            netperf -c -C -H 192.168.1.1 -t TCP_STREAM -- -s131072 -S131072 -m65536

            netperf -c -C -H 192.168.1.1 -t UDP_STREAM -- -s131072 -S131072 -m8192 (if using jumbo frames of 8982)

 

-Rick

________________________________

From: linuxppc-embedded-bounces+moleres=xilinx.com@ozlabs.org [mailto:linuxppc-embedded-bounces+moleres=xilinx.com@ozlabs.org] On Behalf Of MingLiu
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 2:32 AM
To: kentaro; linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
Subject: RE: ML405 gigabit ethernet with kernel 2.6.23

 

Dear Kentaro,

-------------------------------------------------------------
"netperf -H 192.168.1.1 -t TCP_STREAM" 110 Mbps
"netperf -H 192.168.1.1 -t UDP_STREAM" 210 Mbps
-------------------------------------------------------------

Are these results the ones with or without Jumbo-frame enabled? If no, they are quite good I think. The results from Montavista probably are the ones with Jumbo-frame enabled. 
 
For anybody who has interest on this topic, I have recently an accepted paper which has part of the content on this. The link is http://web.it.kth.se/‾mingliu/publications/co_design(icfpt07).pdf and in 6.2 section, I listed our measurement results. 300Mbps for TCP and 400Mbps for UDP, with Jumbo-frame enabled. Unfortunately I did not explain the details and detailed configurations on our case. So these results are only for your reference.
 
BR
Ming

________________________________

用 Windows Live Spaces 展示个性自我，与好友分享生活！ 了解更多信息！ <http://spaces.live.com/?page=HP>