On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 5:48 AM, Jamal Hadi Salim [off-list ref] wrote:

On 09/25/14 04:25, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:

quoted

On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 18:13:57 -0400

quoted

I've done measurements with netperf-wrapper:

http://netoptimizer.blogspot.dk/2014/09/mini-tutorial-for-netperf-wrapper-setup.html

I have already previously posted my measurements here:
  http://people.netfilter.org/hawk/qdisc/
  http://people.netfilter.org/hawk/qdisc/measure01/
  http://people.netfilter.org/hawk/qdisc/experiment01/

Theres a lot of data there to digest; all good looking.
I will try to pay attention to detail and get back to you.
What you have on those urls is fit for a paper, but what someone
like me (with ADD) needs is a summary somewhere maybe in the commit
logs.

quoted

Please, see my previous mail where I described each graph.

Is this patch 0?
I think a simple statement in the commit log that no cats
were harmed ^W^W^W performance was affected. A paragraph
at most but if you want to do more, DaveM actually has no
problems if you write the details of a novel in patch 0.

+1

A few test results in patch 0 are good. I like to have results for
with and without patch. These should two things: 1) Any regressions
caused by the patch 2) Performance gains (in that order of importance
:-) ). There doesn't need to be a lot here, just something reasonably
representative, simple, and should be easily reproducible. My
expectation in bulk dequeue is that we should see no obvious
regression and hopefully an improvement in CPU utilization-- are you
able to verify this?

cheers,
jamal