Re: [PATCH 0/1] ixgbe: Support for Intel(R) 10GbE PCI Express adapters - Take #2

2007-07-26 Thread Rick Jones
Thanks for the feedback Rick. We haven't used the netperf trunk. The person who actually got these numbers will be trying the netperf trunk little later and we will post the results.. Just in case someone has top-of-trunk worries, the basic single-stream, bidirectional stuff is in the 2.4.3 rel

RE: [PATCH 0/1] ixgbe: Support for Intel(R) 10GbE PCI Express adapters - Take #2

2007-07-26 Thread Veeraiyan, Ayyappan
On 7/23/07, Rick Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >The bidirectional looks like a two concurrent stream (TCP_STREAM + >TCP_MAERTS) >test right? > >If you want a single-stream bidirectional test, then with the top of trunk >netperf you can use: > Thanks for the feedback Rick. We haven't used the

Re: [PATCH 0/1] ixgbe: Support for Intel(R) 10GbE PCI Express adapters - Take #2

2007-07-23 Thread Rick Jones
Bidirectional test. 87380 65536 6553660.01 7809.57 28.6630.022.405 2.519 TX 87380 65536 6553660.01 7592.90 28.6630.022.474 2.591 RX -- 87380 65536 6553660.01 7629.73 28.3229.642.433 2.546 RX 87380 65536 6553

RE: [PATCH 0/1] ixgbe: Support for Intel(R) 10GbE PCI Express adapters - Take #2

2007-07-17 Thread Veeraiyan, Ayyappan
On 7/10/07, Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Veeraiyan, Ayyappan wrote: > On 7/10/07, Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> > I will post the performance numbers later today.. Sorry for not responding earlier. We faced couple of issues lik

Re: [PATCH 0/1] ixgbe: Support for Intel(R) 10GbE PCI Express adapters - Take #2

2007-07-10 Thread Kok, Auke
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This patch adds support for the Intel(R) 82598 based PCI Express 10GbE adapters. Please find the full driver as a patch to latest linus-2.6 tree here: git-pull git://lost.foo-projects.org/~aveerani/git/linux-2.6 ixgbe Andrew, I rebased this with the new driver cod

Re: [PATCH 0/1] ixgbe: Support for Intel(R) 10GbE PCI Express adapters - Take #2

2007-07-10 Thread Jeff Garzik
Veeraiyan, Ayyappan wrote: On 7/10/07, Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Doing both tends to signal that the author hasn't bothered to measure the differences between various approaches, and pick a clear winner. I did pick NAPI in our previous submission based o

RE: [PATCH 0/1] ixgbe: Support for Intel(R) 10GbE PCI Express adapters - Take #2

2007-07-10 Thread Veeraiyan, Ayyappan
On 7/10/07, Jeff Garzik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Doing both tends to signal that the author hasn't bothered to measure > the differences between various approaches, and pick a clear winner. > I did pick NAPI in our previous submission based on various tests. But

Re: [PATCH 0/1] ixgbe: Support for Intel(R) 10GbE PCI Express adapters - Take #2

2007-07-10 Thread Jeff Garzik
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 7. NAPI mode uses sigle Rx queue and so fake netdev usage is removed. 8. Non-NAPI mode is added. Honestly I'm not sure about drivers that have both NAPI and non-NAPI paths. Several existing drivers do this, and in almost every case, I tend to feel the driver would ben