Re: Measuring tools - top and interrupts
- From: Erik Mouw <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 19:31:29 +0200
On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 09:58:08AM -0700, Danial Thom wrote:
--- Erik Mouw <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
75K packets/s isn't too hard for modern NICs,
especially when using
NAPI.
Well thats just a ridiculous answer, so why
bother?
You polling guys just crack me up. There isn't
much less work to be done with polling. The only
reason you THINK its less work is because the
measuring tools don't work properly. You still
have to process the same number of packets when
you poll, and you have polls instead of
interrupts. Since you can control the # of
interrupts with most cards, there is zero
advantage to polling, and more negatives.
There certainly is less work to be done with polling. Less IRQs means
less expensive context switches, which means a lower system load. See
Documentation/NAPI_HOWTO.txt for information and a link to the Linux
NAPI paper.
And 75K pps may not be "much", but its still at
least 10% of what the system can handle, so it
should measure around a 10% load. 2.4 measures
about 12% load. So the only conclusion is that
load accounting is broken in 2.6.
Network traffic is usually IO bound, not CPU bound. The load figures
top shows tell something about the amount of work the CPU has to do,
not about how busy your PCI bus (or whatever bus the NIC lives on) is.
IIRC the networking layer in 2.6 differs quite a lot from 2.4, so the
load average figures can be quite misleading.
Erik
--
+-- Erik Mouw -- www.harddisk-recovery.com -- +31 70 370 12 90 --
| Lab address: Delftechpark 26, 2628 XH, Delft, The Netherlands
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Measuring tools - top and interrupts
- From: Danial Thom
- Re: Measuring tools - top and interrupts
- From: sena seneviratne
- Re: Measuring tools - top and interrupts
- From: Danial Thom
- Re: Measuring tools - top and interrupts
- References:
- Re: Measuring tools - top and interrupts
- From: Erik Mouw
- Re: Measuring tools - top and interrupts
- From: Danial Thom
- Re: Measuring tools - top and interrupts
- Prev by Date: Re: UML compilation fails on JB_*
- Next by Date: Re: AGPGART: unable to get memory for graphics translation table.
- Previous by thread: Re: Measuring tools - top and interrupts
- Next by thread: Re: Measuring tools - top and interrupts
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|