From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Sep 16 19:27:12 2008 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23492106567F for ; Tue, 16 Sep 2008 19:27:12 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Received: from weak.local (freefall.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 888CE8FC2E; Tue, 16 Sep 2008 19:27:11 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <48D00899.4070908@FreeBSD.org> Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 20:27:21 +0100 From: Kris Kennaway User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.16 (Macintosh/20080707) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jian Qiu References: <48CF6450.6020909@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: What's the status of parallel netisr? X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2008 19:27:12 -0000 Jian Qiu wrote: > Interesting. > > I did a test on local UDP throughput. > > I was surprised to find out the performance with a SMP kernel was > worse than UP. (~74MB/s v.s. 96 MB/s). > > I had though parallel netisr might be a solution. Make sure you are testing with either 8.0 or 7.1 (or late 7.0-STABLE), i.e. after the fixes to improve UDP performance on SMP systems. Kris