From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Sep 18 19:27:20 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 A81ED1065685 for ; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 19:27:20 +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 E56478FC1D; Thu, 18 Sep 2008 19:27:19 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from kris@FreeBSD.org) Message-ID: <48D2ABA2.8010703@FreeBSD.org> Date: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 20:27:30 +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> <48D00899.4070908@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: Thu, 18 Sep 2008 19:27:20 -0000 Jian Qiu wrote: > Thanks again for the info. > > As you suggested, I did test on the most recent 7.0-stable-200807 kernel. > > The SMP throughout on the new kernel was improved to around 90MB/s. > > However, SMP kernel still had no advantage over UP, at least for this > kind of single threaded applications. > > I further did the same test on Linux with both SMP and UP. > > I did observe the same trend. > > The throughput on UP (~210MB/ecs) was also much better than SMP (~170MB/sec). > > However, I was surprised again that the local UDP throughput on Linux > was more than double of FreeBSD. > > Since all these tests were performed on the same machine, it must be > because of the kernel that made such big differences. > > I'm curious what is the major performance bottleneck in FreeBSD network stack?? > > Is there any plan in community to address these issues? In our application-level tests FreeBSD significantly out-performs Linux, so either you have found a different workload, or something is not configured equally. One important thing I can think of off the top of my head is that Linux has a larger socket buffer size by default, so try tuning that on FreeBSD or confirm they are equal. If that still fails, can you provide test code? Kris