RE: linux-next network throughput performance regression

[Dexuan Cui]

> From: David Miller [mailto:davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Monday, November 9, 2015 11:24
> ...
> > Thanks, David!
> > I understand 1 TX queue is the bottleneck (however in Simon's
> > test, TX=1 => 36.7Gb/s, TX=8 => 37.7 Gb/s, so it looks the TX=1 bottleneck
> > is not so obvious).
> > I'm just wondering how the bottleneck became much narrower with
> > recent linux-next in Simon's result (36.7 Gb/s vs. 18.2 Gb/s). IMO there
> > must be some latency somewhere.
> 
> I think the whole thing here is that you misinterpreted what Eric said.
> 
> He is not arguing that some regression did, or did not, happen.
> 
> He instead was making the basic statement about the fact that due to
> the lack of paralellness a single stream TCP case is harder to
> optimize for high speed NICs.
> 
> That is all.
Thanks, I got it. 
I'm actually new to network performance tuning, trying to understand
all the related details. :-)

Thanks,
-- Dexuan
--
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/