lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Oct]   [4]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: big picture UDP/IP performance question re 2.6.18 -> 2.6.32
At 12:38 PM 10/4/2011 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
>On Tue, 2011-10-04 at 14:16 -0500, Christoph Lameter wrote:
>> On Mon, 3 Oct 2011, starlight@binnacle.cx wrote:
>> > I've come to the conclusion that Eric is right
>> > and the primary issue is an increase in the
>> > cost of scheduler context switches. Have
>> > been watching this number and it has held
>> > pretty close to 200k/sec under all scenarios
>> > and kernel versions, so it has to be
>> > a longer code-path, bigger cache pressure
>> > or both in the scheduler. Sadly this makes
>> > newer kernels a no-go for us.
>> We had similar experiences. Basically latency
>> constantly gets screwed up by the new fancy
>> features being added to the scheduler and network
>> subsystem (most notorious is the new "fair"
>> scheduler, 2.6.23 made a big
>> step down).
>
>Idly curious, have you compared bfs performance?
>http://ck.kolivas.org/patches/bfs/bfs-faq.txt

No but it certainly does look very interesting.

Looks like trying it out not much more work than
patching and building a kernel and running the
benchmark. Will take a look and report back
if I do. Little busy at present but should
have time in a week or so.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-10-04 21:49    [W:0.088 / U:0.124 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site