Messages in this thread |  | | From | "Paul Rolland" <> | Subject | Re: e100 latency, cpu cycle saver and e1000... | Date | Wed, 21 May 2003 16:15:35 +0200 |
| |
Hello,
> My little program was crude at best. Yes, I know, but it does exist !
> You have to take into account what the machines are doing. > If you notice, the "Min" latency is about the same, so it's > not a CPU cycle saver. The long "Max" latencies mean you > probably have something on IP2 that is blocking the execution > of the IP stack (for, say up to 4.5ms). > Are all the machine completely quiesced except for the test program? > Have you tried switching the network connections to see if it > is in the network hardware?
Correct, machines are not idle... but - they are doing globally the same work, - this behavior is something I can reproduce test after test, since I've started this morning...
I started using that because IP1 was exhibiting high latency yesterday 'til I rebooted it, and since it is working quite fine... Of course, I can reboot also IP2, but I'd like to understand why and how to avoid it later...
Regards, Paul
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |