ssion.
Thank Eric, Valdis, and David!
Signed-off-by: Zhang Yanmin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Acked-by: Eric Dumazet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
--- linux-2.6.25-rc1/include/net/dst.h 2008-02-21 14:33:43.0 +0800
+++ linux-2.6.25-rc1_work/include/net/dst.h 2008-02-22 12:52:19.0
On Tue, 2008-02-19 at 08:40 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Zhang, Yanmin a �crit :
> > On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 12:33 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:12:38 +0800, "Zhang, Yanmin" said:
> >>
> >>> I also think __r
On Tue, 2008-02-19 at 08:35 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Zhang, Yanmin a �crit :
> > On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 11:11 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:12:38 +0800
> >> "Zhang, Yanmin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> &g
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 12:33 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:12:38 +0800, "Zhang, Yanmin" said:
>
> > I also think __refcnt is the key. I did a new testing by adding 2 unsigned
> > long
> > pading before lastuse, so the 3 members
On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 11:11 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:12:38 +0800
> "Zhang, Yanmin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 15:22 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> > > From: Eric Dumazet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]&g
long
pading before lastuse, so the 3 members are moved to next cache line. The
performance is
recovered.
How about below patch? Almost all performance is recovered with the new patch.
Signed-off-by: Zhang Yanmin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
--- linux-2.6.25-rc1/include/net/dst.h 2008-02-21
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 15:21 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Zhang, Yanmin a écrit :
> > On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 07:05 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> >
> >> Zhang, Yanmin a �crit :
> >>
> >>> Comparing with kernel 2.6.24, tbench result has regression wi
On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 07:05 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Zhang, Yanmin a �crit :
> > Comparing with kernel 2.6.24, tbench result has regression with
> > 2.6.25-rc1.
> >
> > 1) On 2 quad-core processor stoakley: 4%.
> > 2) On 4 quad-core processor tigerton: more
Comparing with kernel 2.6.24, tbench result has regression with
2.6.25-rc1.
1) On 2 quad-core processor stoakley: 4%.
2) On 4 quad-core processor tigerton: more than 30%.
bisect located below patch.
b4ce92775c2e7ff9cf79cca4e0a19c8c5fd6287b is first bad commit
commit b4ce92775c2e7ff9cf79cca4e0a19
On Wed, 2008-01-23 at 08:42 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 10:36 -0800, Rick Jones wrote:
> > When parsing the -P option in scan_socket_args() of src/nettest_bsd.c,
> > netperf is using "break_args()" from src/netsh.c which indeed if the
> > co
On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 10:36 -0800, Rick Jones wrote:
> When parsing the -P option in scan_socket_args() of src/nettest_bsd.c,
> netperf is using "break_args()" from src/netsh.c which indeed if the
> command line says "-P 12345" will set both the local and remote port
> numbers to 12345. If inst
On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 07:27 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Zhang, Yanmin a �crit :
> > On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 13:24 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> >> On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 09:46 -0800, Rick Jones wrote:
> >>>>> *) netperf/netserver support CPU affinity within th
On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 22:22 -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: "Zhang, Yanmin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 14:07:19 +0800
>
> > I am wondering if UDP stack in kernel has a bug.
>
> If one server binds to INADDR_ANY with port N, then any othe
On Tue, 2008-01-22 at 13:24 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 09:46 -0800, Rick Jones wrote:
> > >>*) netperf/netserver support CPU affinity within themselves with the
> > >>global -T option to netperf. Is the result with taskset much different?
>
On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 09:46 -0800, Rick Jones wrote:
> >>*) netperf/netserver support CPU affinity within themselves with the
> >>global -T option to netperf. Is the result with taskset much different?
> >> The equivalent to the above would be to run netperf with:
> >>
> >>./netperf -T 0,7 ..
On Wed, 2008-01-16 at 08:34 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 21:53 +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 08:44:40AM +, Ilpo Jrvinen wrote:
> > >
> > > > > I tried to use bisect to locate the bad patch between 2.6.22 and
> &
On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 21:53 +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 08:44:40AM +, Ilpo J�rvinen wrote:
> >
> > > > I tried to use bisect to locate the bad patch between 2.6.22 and
> > > > 2.6.23-rc1,
> > > > but the bisected kernel wasn't stable and went crazy.
> >
> > TCP work bet
On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 11:21 +0200, Ilpo J�rvinen wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Ilpo J�rvinen wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 11 Jan 2008, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 17:35 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> > > >
> > > > As a matter
On Fri, 2008-01-11 at 09:56 -0800, Rick Jones wrote:
> >>The test command is:
> >>#sudo taskset -c 7 ./netserver
> >>#sudo taskset -c 0 ./netperf -t TCP_RR -l 60 -H 127.0.0.1 -i 50,3 -I 99,5
> >>-- -r 1,1
>
> A couple of comments/questions on the command lines:
Thanks for your kind comments.
>
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 17:35 +0800, Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> The regression is:
> 1)stoakley with 2 qual-core processors: 11%;
> 2)Tulsa with 4 dual-core(+hyperThread) processors:13%;
I have new update on this issue and also cc to netdev maillist.
Thank David Miller for pointing me t
On Thu, 2006-07-06 at 03:44, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 05, 2006 at 08:49:27AM -0700, Auke Kok wrote:
> > Zhang, Yanmin wrote:
> > >On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 00:26, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> > >>Adds PCI Error recovery callbacks to the Intel 10-gigabit ethernet
>
On Fri, 2006-06-30 at 00:26, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> Adds PCI Error recovery callbacks to the Intel 10-gigabit ethernet
> ixgb device driver. Lightly tested, works.
>
> Signed-off-by: Linas Vepstas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> +/**
> + * ixgb_io_error_detected() - called when PCI error is detected
> + * @
>>-Original Message-
>>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Linas Vepstas
>>Sent: 2006年3月25日 11:22
>>To: Greg KH
>>Cc: Jeff Garzik; Ronciak, John; Brandeburg, Jesse; Kirsher, Jeffrey T;
>>linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; netdev@vger.kernel.org;
>>[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [
On Fri, 2006-04-07 at 06:24, Linas Vepstas wrote:
> Please apply and forward upstream.
>
> --linas
>
> [PATCH] PCI Error Recovery: e100 network device driver
>
> Various PCI bus errors can be signaled by newer PCI controllers. This
> patch adds the PCI error recovery callbacks to the intel ethe
24 matches
Mail list logo
