[lkml]   [2005]   [Aug]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: 2.6.12 Performance problems
Danial Thom wrote:
> --- Ben Greear <> wrote:
>>Danial Thom wrote:
>>>I think the concensus is that 2.6 has made
>>>offs that lower raw throughput, which is what
>>>networking device needs. So as a router or
>>>network appliance, 2.6 seems less suitable. A
>>>bridging test on a 2.0Ghz operton system:
>>>FreeBSD 4.9: Drops no packets at 900K pps
>>>Linux 2.4.24: Starts dropping packets at 350K
>>>Linux 2.6.12: Starts dropping packets at 100K
>>I ran some quick tests using kernel 2.6.11, 1ms
>>tick (HZ=1000), SMP kernel.
>>Hardware is P-IV 3.0Ghz + HT on a new
>>SuperMicro motherboard with 64/133Mhz
>>PCI-X bus. NIC is dual Intel pro/1000. Kernel
>>is close to stock 2.6.11.
>>I used brctl to create a bridge with the two
>>GigE adapters in it and
>>used pktgen to stream traffic through it
>>(250kpps in one direction, 1kpps in
>>the other.)
>>I see a reasonable amount of drops at 250kpps
>>(60 byte packets):
>>about 60,000,000 packets received, 20,700

I get slightly worse performance on this system when running RH9
with kernel 2.4.29 (my hacks, HZ=1000, SMP). Tried increasing
e1000 descriptors to 2048 tx and rx, but that didn't help, or at least
not much.

Will try some other tunings, but I doubt it will affect performance
enough to come close to the discrepency that you show between 2.4
and 2.6 kernels...

I tried copying a 500MB CDROM to HD on my RH9 system, and only 6kpps
of the 250kpps get through the bridge...btw.


Ben Greear <>
Candela Technologies Inc

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-08-25 08:37    [W:0.056 / U:13.068 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site