From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Sep 22 22:48:25 2006
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0037216A412;
	Fri, 22 Sep 2006 22:48:24 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from cyrus.watson.org (cyrus.watson.org [209.31.154.42])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AFD243D55;
	Fri, 22 Sep 2006 22:48:24 +0000 (GMT)
	(envelope-from rwatson@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from fledge.watson.org (fledge.watson.org [209.31.154.41])
	by cyrus.watson.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7D5646C87;
	Fri, 22 Sep 2006 18:48:23 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 23:48:23 +0100 (BST)
From: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org>
X-X-Sender: robert@fledge.watson.org
To: Andre Oppermann <andre@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <45145F1D.8020005@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <20060922234708.V11343@fledge.watson.org>
References: <4511B9B1.2000903@freebsd.org>
	<17683.63162.919620.114649@grasshopper.cs.duke.edu>
	<45145F1D.8020005@freebsd.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: alc@freebsd.org, freebsd-net@freebsd.org, freebsd-current@freebsd.org,
	tegge@freebsd.org, Andrew Gallatin <gallatin@cs.duke.edu>
Subject: Re: Much improved sendfile(2) kernel implementation
X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>,
	<mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 22:48:25 -0000


On Sat, 23 Sep 2006, Andre Oppermann wrote:

>> Without patch:
>>  87380 393216 393216    10.00      2163.08   100.00   19.35    3.787 
>> 1.466 Without patch + TSO:
>>  87380 393216 393216    10.00      4367.18   71.54    42.07    1.342 
>> 1.578 With patch:
>>  87380 393216 393216    10.01      1882.73   86.15    18.43    3.749 
>> 1.604 With patch + TSO:
>>  87380 393216 393216    10.00      6961.08   47.69    60.11    0.561 
>> 1.415

The impact of TSO is clearly dramatic, especially when combined with the 
patch, but I'm a bit concerned by the drop in performance in the patched 
non-TSO case.  For network cards which will always have TSO enabled, this 
isn't an issue, but do we see a similar affect for drivers without TSO?  What 
can we put this drop down to?

Robert N M Watson
Computer Laboratory
University of Cambridge