> -----Original Message-----
> From: David S. Miller [mailto:davem@redhat.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 16, 2002 12:31 AM
>
> From: Neil Brown <neilb@cse.unsw.edu.au>
> Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2002 13:44:04 +1000
>
> Presumably on a sufficiently large SMP machine that this became an
> issue, there would be multiple NICs. Maybe it would make sense to
> have one udp socket for each NIC. Would that make sense? or work?
> It feels to me to be cleaner than one for each CPU.
>
> Doesn't make much sense.
>
> Usually we are talking via one IP address, and thus over
> one device. It could be using multiple NICs via BONDING,
> but that would be transparent to anything at the socket
> level.
>
> Really, I think there is real value to making the socket
> per-cpu even on a 2 or 4 way system.
having a local socket per CPU is very good for SMP scaling.
it multiplies input buffer space, and reduces socket lock
and CPU cache contention.
sorry, i don't have measurements.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Oct 23 2002 - 22:00:28 EST