On Sun, 30 Sep 2007, jamal wrote:
> This patch adds the usage of batching within the core.
>
> cheers,
> jamal
> [sep30-p2of3 text/plain (6.8KB)]
> [NET_BATCH] net core use batching
>
> This patch adds the usage of batching within the core.
> The same test methodology used in introducing txlock is used, with
> the following results on different kernels:
>
> +------------+--------------+-------------+------------+--------+
> | 64B | 128B | 256B | 512B |1024B |
> +------------+--------------+-------------+------------+--------+
> Original| 467482 | 463061 | 388267 | 216308 | 114704 |
> | | | | | |
> txlock | 468922 | 464060 | 388298 | 216316 | 114709 |
> | | | | | |
> tg3nobtx| 468012 | 464079 | 388293 | 216314 | 114704 |
> | | | | | |
> tg3btxdr| 480794 | 475102 | 388298 | 216316 | 114705 |
> | | | | | |
> tg3btxco| 481059 | 475423 | 388285 | 216308 | 114706 |
> +------------+--------------+-------------+------------+--------+
>
> The first two colums "Original" and "txlock" were introduced in an earlier
> patch and demonstrate a slight increase in performance with txlock.
> "tg3nobtx" shows the tg3 driver with no changes to support batching.
> The purpose of this test is to demonstrate the effect of introducing
> the core changes to a driver that doesnt support them.
> Although this patch brings down perfomance slightly compared to txlock
> for such netdevices, it is still better compared to just the original
> kernel.
> "tg3btxdr" demonstrates the effect of using ->hard_batch_xmit() with tg3
> driver. "tg3btxco" demonstrates the effect of letting the core do all the
> work. As can be seen the last two are not very different in performance.
> The difference is ->hard_batch_xmit() introduces a new method which
> is intrusive.
Have you done performance comparisons for the case of using 9000-byte
jumbo frames?
-Bill
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
