[lkml]   [2007]   [Jun]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: iperf: performance regression (was b44 driver problem?)
    On Monday 04 June 2007, Ingo Molnar wrote:
    > * Stephen Hemminger <> wrote:
    > > Yes, the following patch makes iperf work better than ever. But are
    > > other broken applications going to have same problem. Sounds like the
    > > old "who runs first" fork() problems.
    > this is the first such app and really, and even for this app: i've been
    > frequently running iperf on -rt kernels for _years_ and never noticed
    > how buggy its 'locking' code was, and that it would under some
    > circumstances use up the whole CPU on high-res timers.

    I must admit I don't know much about that topic, but there is one thing I
    don't understand. Why is iperf (even if it's buggy) able to use up the whole
    cpu? I didn't run it as root but as my normal user so it should have limited
    rights. Shouldn't the linux scheduler distribute cpu time among all running

    [unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
     \ /
      Last update: 2007-06-04 21:51    [W:0.023 / U:2.512 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site