From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 12 11:45:19 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: performance@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80DE816A41F; Wed, 12 Oct 2005 11:45:19 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from mrout1.yahoo.com (mrout1.yahoo.com [216.145.54.171]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4841A43D46; Wed, 12 Oct 2005 11:45:19 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from gnn@neville-neil.com) Received: from minion.local.neville-neil.com (proxy8.corp.yahoo.com [216.145.48.13]) by mrout1.yahoo.com (8.13.4/8.13.4/y.out) with ESMTP id j9CBiEpW088169; Wed, 12 Oct 2005 04:44:15 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 20:44:13 +0900 Message-ID: From: gnn@freebsd.org To: Robert Watson In-Reply-To: <20051011145923.B92528@fledge.watson.org> References: <20051005133730.R87201@fledge.watson.org> <20051011145923.B92528@fledge.watson.org> User-Agent: Wanderlust/2.12.2 (99 Luftballons) SEMI/1.14.6 (Maruoka) FLIM/1.14.7 (=?ISO-8859-4?Q?Sanj=F2?=) APEL/10.6 Emacs/21.3.50 (powerpc-apple-darwin8.1.0) MULE/5.0 (SAKAKI) MIME-Version: 1.0 (generated by SEMI 1.14.6 - "Maruoka") Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: performance@freebsd.org, net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Call for performance evaluation: net.isr.direct X-BeenThere: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Performance/tuning List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 11:45:19 -0000 At Tue, 11 Oct 2005 15:01:11 +0100 (BST), rwatson wrote: > If I don't hear anything back in the near future, I will commit a > change to 7.x to make direct dispatch the default, in order to let a > broader community do the testing. :-) If you are setup to easily > test stability and performance relating to direct dispatch, I would > appreciate any help. > One thing I would caution, though I have no proof nor have I made any tests (yes, I know, bad gnn), is that I would expect this change to degrade non-network performance when the network is under load. This kind of change is most likely to help those with purely network loads, i.e. routers, bridges, etc and to hurt anyone else. Are you absolutely sure we should make this the default? Later, George