From owner-freebsd-performance@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Jan 28 16:10:37 2011 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 342EA10656CA for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2011 16:10:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from slw@zxy.spb.ru) Received: from zxy.spb.ru (zxy.spb.ru [195.70.199.98]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9FBDF8FC36 for ; Fri, 28 Jan 2011 16:10:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from slw by zxy.spb.ru with local (Exim 4.69 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from ) id 1PiquB-0004eL-S9; Fri, 28 Jan 2011 19:10:35 +0300 Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 19:10:35 +0300 From: Slawa Olhovchenkov To: Stefan Lambrev Message-ID: <20110128161035.GF18170@zxy.spb.ru> References: <20110128143355.GD18170@zxy.spb.ru> <22E77EED-6455-4164-9115-BBD359EC8CA6@moneybookers.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <22E77EED-6455-4164-9115-BBD359EC8CA6@moneybookers.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-SA-Exim-Connect-IP: X-SA-Exim-Mail-From: slw@zxy.spb.ru X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on zxy.spb.ru); SAEximRunCond expanded to false Cc: freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Interrupt performance 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: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 16:10:37 -0000 On Fri, Jan 28, 2011 at 06:03:15PM +0200, Stefan Lambrev wrote: > Do the test with netblast ;) > Most perf tools are written badly and for Linux. > In our internal test netblast running on freebsd outperform everything else. I don't speak about bad performance. I speak about overhead. Linux: overhead 7% for 56K int/s FreeBSD: overhead 59% for 14K int/s For processing 1/4 interrupts FreeBSD need 8x CPU. > P.S. - /usr/src/tools/tools/netrate/netblast - we have tested little more expensive card - em/igb and bce. > > On Jan 28, 2011, at 4:33 PM, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > > I test network performance and found some strange result -- on the > > same hardware Linux more then 10x used CPU resources for interrupt > > processing. > > > > FreeBSD system utilise 70% CPU (32% idle, 59% interrupt, 9% sys) and > > network card generate 14K-18K interrupt per second. > > > > Linux system utilise 20% CPU (80% idle, 13% system, 3% hiq, 4% siq) > > and network card generate 56K interrupt per second. > > > > I used 'netperf -H host -t UDP_STREAM -l 60 -C -c -- -m 8972 -s > > 128K -S 128K' for generate network traffic. > > > > NIC: > > > > re0: port 0x4000-0x40ff mem 0xf0100000-0xf01000ff irq 19 at device 4.0 on pci11 > > re0: Chip rev. 0x18000000 > > re0: MAC rev. 0x00000000 > > miibus0: on re0 > > rgephy0: PHY 1 on miibus0 > > > > > > CPU: > > > > CPU: Intel(R) Celeron(R) CPU 420 @ 1.60GHz (1596.05-MHz K8-class CPU) > > Origin = "GenuineIntel" Id = 0x10661 Family = 6 Model = 16 > > Stepping = 1 > > Features=0xafebfbff > > Features2=0xe31d > > AMD Features=0x20100800 > > AMD Features2=0x1 > > TSC: P-state invariant > > > > RAM: one DDR2-667 DIMM. > > > > OS: 8.2-RC2, amd64 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" > > -- > Best Wishes, > Stefan Lambrev > ICQ# 24134177 > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-performance@freebsd.org mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-performance > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-performance-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"