lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Jun]   [6]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRE: [PATCH 09/10] dpaa_eth: add support for hardware timestamping
Date
Hi Richard,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Richard Cochran [mailto:richardcochran@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, June 5, 2018 9:58 PM
> To: Y.b. Lu <yangbo.lu@nxp.com>
> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; Madalin-cristian Bucur
> <madalin.bucur@nxp.com>; Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>; Shawn Guo
> <shawnguo@kernel.org>; David S . Miller <davem@davemloft.net>;
> devicetree@vger.kernel.org; linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org;
> linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
> Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/10] dpaa_eth: add support for hardware timestamping
>
> On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 03:35:28AM +0000, Y.b. Lu wrote:
> > [Y.b. Lu] Actually these timestamping codes affected DPAA networking
> performance in our previous performance test.
> > That's why we used ifdef for it.
>
> How much does time stamping hurt performance?
>
> If the time stamping is compiled in but not enabled at run time, does it still
> affect performace?

[Y.b. Lu] I can't remember and find the old data since it had been a long time.
I just did the iperf test today between two 10G ports. I didn’t see any performance changes with timestamping code 😊
So, let's me remove the ifdef in next version.
Thanks a lot.


>
> Thanks,
> Richard
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-06-06 13:49    [W:0.034 / U:6.916 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site