lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jul]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: >10% performance degradation since 2.6.18
Herbert Xu wrote:
> Jeff Garzik <jeff@garzik.org> wrote:
>> What's the best setup for power usage?
>> What's the best setup for performance?
>> Are they the same?
>
> Yes.

Is this a blind guess, or is there real world testing across multiple
setups behind this answer?

Consider a 2-package, quad-core system with 3 userland threads actively
performing network communication, plus periodic, low levels of network
activity from OS utilities (such as nightly 'yum upgrade').

That is essentially an under-utilized 8-CPU system. For such a case, it
seems like a power win to idle or power down a few cores, or maybe even
an entire package.

Efficient power usage means scaling _down_ when activity decreases. A
blind "distribute network activity across all CPUs" policy does not
appear to be responsive to that type of situation.


>> Is it most optimal to have the interrupt for socket $X occur on the same
>> CPU as where the app is running?
>
> Yes.

Same question: blind guess, or do you have numbers?

Consider two competing CPU hogs: a kernel with tons of netfilter tables
and rules, plus an application that uses a lot of CPU.

Can you not reach a threshold where it makes more sense to split kernel
and userland work onto different CPUs?


>> If yes, how to best handle when the scheduler moves app to another CPU?
>> Should we reprogram the NIC hardware flow steering mechanism at that point?
>
> Not really. For now the best thing to do is to pin everything
> down and not move at all, because we can't afford to move.
>
> The only way for moving to work is if we had the ability to get
> the sockets to follow the processes. That means, we must have
> one RX queue per socket.

That seems to presume it is impossible to reprogram the NIC RX queue
selection rules?

If you can add a new 'flow' to a NIC hardware RX queue, surely you can
imagine a remove + add operation for a migrated 'flow'... and thus, at
least on the NIC hardware level, flows can follow processes.

Jeff




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-07-05 22:49    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans