Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 27 Jun 2006 09:07:38 -0700 | From | Ben Greear <> | Subject | Re: [patch 2/6] [Network namespace] Network device sharing by view |
| |
Ben Greear wrote: > Herbert Poetzl wrote: > >> On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 03:13:17PM -0700, Ben Greear wrote: > > >> yes, that sounds good to me, any numbers how that >> affects networking in general (performance wise and >> memory wise, i.e. caches and hashes) ... > > > I'll run some tests later today. Based on my previous tests, > I don't remember any significant overhead.
Here's a quick benchmark using my redirect devices (RDD). Each RDD comes in a pair...when you tx on one, the pkt is rx'd on the peer. The idea is that it is exactly like two physical ethernet interfaces connected by a cross-over cable.
My test system is a 64-bit dual-core Intel system, 3.013 Ghz processor with 1GB RAM. Fairly standard stuff..it's one of the Shuttle XPC systems. Kernel is 2.6.16.16 (64-bit).
Test setup is: rdd1 -- rdd2 [bridge] rdd3 -- rdd4
I am using my proprietary module for the bridge logic...and the default bridge should be at least this fast. I am injecting 1514 byte packets on rdd1 and rdd4 with pktgen (bi-directional flow). My pktgen is also receiving the pkts and gathering stats.
This setup sustains 1.7Gbps of generated and received traffic between rdd1 and rdd4.
Running only the [bridge] between two 10/100/1000 ports on an Intel PCI-E NIC will sustain about 870Mbps (bi-directional) on this system, so the virtual devices are quite efficient, as suspected.
I have not yet had time to benchmark the mac-vlans...hopefully later today.
Thanks, Ben
-- Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com> Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com
- 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/
| |