On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 12:01:17AM +0400, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote: > On 29.08.2013 05:32, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:24:48AM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote: > > > >>> .. > >>> while Intel DPDK claims 80MPPS (and 6windgate talks about 160 or so) on > >>> the same-class hardware and > >>> _userland_ forwarding. > >> Those numbers sound a bit far out. Maybe if the packet isn't touched > >> or looked at at all in a pure netmap interface to interface bridging > >> scenario. I don't believe these numbers. > > 80*64*8 = 40.960 Gb/s > > May be DCA? And use CPU with 40 PCIe lane and 4 memory chanell. > Intel introduces DDIO instead of DCA: > http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/io/direct-data-i-o.html > (and it seems DCA does not help much): > https://www.myricom.com/software/myri10ge/790-how-do-i-enable-intel-direct-cache-access-dca-with-the-linux-myri10ge-driver.html > https://www.myricom.com/software/myri10ge/783-how-do-i-get-the-best-performance-with-my-myri-10g-network-adapters-on-a-host-that-supports-intel-data-direct-i-o-ddio.html > > (However, DPDK paper notes DDIO is of signifficant helpers)
Ha, Intel paper say SMT is signifficant better HT. In real word -- same shit. For network application, if buffring need more then L3 cache, what happening? May be some bad things... _______________________________________________ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
