On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 7:31 PM, Dexuan Cui <decui@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> 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. :-) > You might want to look at https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/scaling.txt as an introduction to the scaling capabilities of the stack. Tom > Thanks, > -- Dexuan > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
