Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Optimize TCP sendmsg in favour of fast devices?
From: Krishna Kumar2 <hidden>
Date: 2010-01-29 11:38:23
Herbert Xu [off-list ref] wrote on 01/29/2010 05:03:46 PM:
quoted
Same 5 runs of single netperf's: 0. Driver unsets F_SG but sets F_GSO: Org (16K): BW: 18180.71 SD: 13.485 New (16K): BW: 18113.15 SD: 13.551 Org (64K): BW: 21980.28 SD: 10.306 New (64K): BW: 21386.59 SD: 10.447 1. Driver unsets F_SG, and with GSO off Org (16K): BW: 10894.62 SD: 26.591 New (16K): BW: 7262.10 SD: 35.340 Org (64K): BW: 12396.41 SD: 23.357 New (64K): BW: 7853.02 SD: 32.405 2. Driver unsets F_SG and uses ethtool to set GSO: Org (16K): BW: 18094.11 SD: 13.603 New (16K): BW: 17952.38 SD: 13.743 Org (64K): BW: 21540.78 SD: 10.771 New (64K): BW: 21818.35 SD: 10.598Hmm, any idea what is causing case 0 to be different from case 2? In particular, the 64K performance in case 0 appears to be a regression but in case 2 it's showing up as an improvement. AFAICS these two cases should produce identical results, or is this just jitter across tests?
You are right about the jitter. I have run this many times, most of the times #0 and #2 are almost identical, but sometimes varies a bit. Also about my earlier ethtool comment:
Yes, an ethtool bug (version 6). The test case #1 above, I have written that GSO is off but ethtool "thinks" it is on (after a modprobe -r cxgb3; modprobe cxgb3). So for test #2, I simply run "ethtool ... gso on", and GSO is now really on in the kernel, explaining the better results.
Hmmm, I had a bad ethtool it seems. I built the latest one to debug this problem but this shows settings correctly. thanks, - KK