From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Mar 29 17:21:14 2015
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B636E335;
 Sun, 29 Mar 2015 17:21:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68A5EDC4;
 Sun, 29 Mar 2015 17:21:14 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.84 (FreeBSD))
 (envelope-from <slw@zxy.spb.ru>)
 id 1YcGtb-000OAk-FX; Sun, 29 Mar 2015 20:21:11 +0300
Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2015 20:21:11 +0300
From: Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru>
To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: irq cpu binding
Message-ID: <20150329172111.GP23643@zxy.spb.ru>
References: <20150328230533.GI23643@zxy.spb.ru>
 <CAJ-VmongWE_z7Rod8-SoFmyiLqiTbHtSaAwjgAs05L_Z3jrWXA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150328234116.GJ23643@zxy.spb.ru>
 <CAJ-VmokSHHm3kMwz=bp7VbgZwADD2_pEr27NdzUfkGq1U=x_sw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150329003354.GK23643@zxy.spb.ru>
 <CAJ-VmonmeeTaSOpSJCJTP7yTeno1LEt-dt9wEhNHk36oY6yY7Q@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150329081902.GN23643@zxy.spb.ru>
 <CAJ-Vmo=zzg82rk_jnsCVJCG8qp-fAWWYfcjpbxBznJH39cBTxA@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150329155855.GO23643@zxy.spb.ru>
 <CAJ-Vmo=MSW_tAs5egSkmJJe6dXKaePKBoVz=GD8Df8UdBauK=A@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmo=MSW_tAs5egSkmJJe6dXKaePKBoVz=GD8Df8UdBauK=A@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: <locally generated>
X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Cc: "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18-1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
 <freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-hackers>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 Mar 2015 17:21:14 -0000

On Sun, Mar 29, 2015 at 10:01:06AM -0700, Adrian Chadd wrote:

> Well, have you seen how fast the windows network apps can get? Not the
> gui torrent clients, but the really serious HTTP intermediary stuff
> and message passing stuff?
> 
> The model works and scales quite well.. :0

"how fast"... What is "fast"? How we calculate speed?
In what enviroment (dual or single socket)?
nginx is acceptable fast. FreeBSD is acceptable fast.
But I am need less overhead [for multi-socket system].
I am may be wrong.
I am use dual-socket systems.
And when I am think about pinning to CPU I am think about elimination
transfer context by QPI link.
May be for single-socket systems this is will be less impact.
May be double of interrupt/network/TCP processing thread gain lock
congestion and eliminate all win.
You have other opinion?

About NUMA. I have expirense with Tilera. Perfomance with NUMA off
(interleave memory) will be better.