Re: >10% performance degradation since 2.6.18

[Herbert Xu]

On Sun, Jul 05, 2009 at 07:09:26AM -0600, Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> 
> Maybe not one RX queue per socket -- sockets belonging to the same
> thread could share the same RX queue.  I'm fairly ignorant of the way
> networking works these days; is it possible to dynamically reassign a
> socket between RX queues, so we'd only need one RX queue per CPU?

Not reliably.  You can tweak the hash in the NIC to redirect
traffic (aka flow director) but ultimately if you've got more
sockets than queues then it's a losing game.

A better strategy for now is to pin everything down and try to
get user-space involved by using threads and distributing the
sockets based on which queue they're associated with.

Cheers,
-- 
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
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/