Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 19:39:11 -0500 From: Pierre Lamy <pierre@userid.org> To: Slawa Olhovchenkov <slw@zxy.spb.ru>, freebsd-performance@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Interrupt performance Message-ID: <4D4361AF.9090602@userid.org> In-Reply-To: <20110128184459.GI18170@zxy.spb.ru> References: <20110128143355.GD18170@zxy.spb.ru> <22E77EED-6455-4164-9115-BBD359EC8CA6@moneybookers.com> <20110128184459.GI18170@zxy.spb.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On a Lanner 7535 atom d510 system DUT, using a single gig port, running
-CURRENT from Jan 6.
input (Total) output
packets errs idrops bytes packets errs bytes colls
410015 0 0 43461452 204 0 15592 0
410341 0 0 43496128 203 0 14546 0
408855 0 0 43338492 204 0 15400 0
408812 0 0 43333980 201 0 14278 0
408802 0 0 43332874 203 0 15170 0
408827 0 0 43335570 201 0 14278 0
procs memory page disk faults cpu
r b w avm fre flt re pi po fr sr ad5 in sy cs us
sy id
0 0 0 383M 3669M 64 0 0 0 4 0 42 2074 260 4247 0
25 75
0 0 0 383M 3669M 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1820 168 3622 0
25 75
0 0 0 383M 3669M 65 0 0 0 0 0 2 2112 279 4240 0
23 77
Sending box:
<root.wheel@pyr-dev-23c> [/var/preserve/root] # ./netblast 5.5.5.243 80
64 60
start: 1296261208.502195530
finish: 1296261268.503127492
send calls: 33880997
send errors: 9389311
approx send rate: 408194
approx error rate: 0
On 1/28/2011 1:44 PM, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
> 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.
>>
>> P.S. - /usr/src/tools/tools/netrate/netblast - we have tested little more expensive card - em/igb and bce.
> Now I install 8.2-RC2/i386 and use netblast:
>
> # /usr/obj/usr/src/tools/tools/netrate/netblast/netblast 10.200.0.1 1122 1400 10
>
> start: 1296239273.106911353
> finish: 1296239283.107222845
> send calls: 2703219
> send errors: 2090049
> approx send rate: 61317
> approx error rate: 0
>
> CPU load (No difference with netperf):
>
> iostat:
> tty ad0 cpu
> tin tout KB/t tps MB/s us ni sy in id
> 1 48 0.00 0 0.00 4 0 47 20 29
> 0 44 0.00 0 0.00 2 0 68 30 0
> 0 44 0.00 0 0.00 12 0 65 23 0
> 0 44 0.00 0 0.00 6 0 73 21 0
> 0 44 0.00 0 0.00 8 0 54 38 0
> 0 44 0.00 0 0.00 5 0 66 29 0
> 0 44 0.00 0 0.00 7 0 65 29 0
> 0 44 0.00 0 0.00 7 0 64 29 0
> 0 44 0.00 0 0.00 8 0 64 28 0
> 0 44 0.00 0 0.00 7 0 57 35 0
> 0 235 0.00 0 0.00 4 0 13 12 71
>
> vmstat:
> procs memory page disk faults cpu
> r b w avm fre flt re pi po fr sr ad0 in sy cs us sy id
> 1 0 0 97748K 431M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15331 269981 30697 6 94 0
> 1 0 0 97748K 431M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15333 269072 30716 5 95 0
> 1 0 0 97748K 431M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15332 269512 30690 9 91 0
> 1 0 0 97748K 431M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15331 269633 30698 8 92 0
> 1 0 0 97748K 431M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15334 269613 30693 7 93 0
> 1 0 0 97748K 431M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15332 269438 30713 13 87 0
> 1 0 0 97748K 431M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15337 269460 30705 7 93 0
> 1 0 0 97748K 431M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15299 266321 30617 6 94 0
> 1 0 0 97748K 431M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 15300 266147 30625 11 89 0
>
>
> (Linux, for compare, only 1279 cs)
>
> systat -vmstat 1
> 3 users Load 0.29 0.09 0.07 Jan 28 21:31
>
> Mem:KB REAL VIRTUAL VN PAGER SWAP PAGER
> Tot Share Tot Share Free in out in out
> Act 16068 4496 99772 5208 440312 count
> All 37664 6644 2227916 10384 pages
> Proc: Interrupts
> r p d s w Csw Trp Sys Int Sof Flt cow 17372 total
> 1 23 30k 12 270k 15k 30k zfod atkbd0 1
> ozfod ata0 irq14
> 63.2%Sys 29.3%Intr 7.5%User 0.0%Nice 0.0%Idle %ozfod ata1 irq15
> | | | | | | | | | | | daefr 15366 re0 irq19
> ================================++++++++++++++>>>> prcfr 2006 cpu0: time
> 1 dtbuf totfr
> Namei Name-cache Dir-cache 34738 desvn react
> Calls hits % hits % 595 numvn pdwak
> 34 frevn pdpgs
> intrn
> Disks ad0 26572 wire
> KB/t 0.00 12800 act
> tps 0 12732 inact
> MB/s 0.00 104 cache
> %busy 0 440208 free
> 11552 buf
>
>
>> 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:<RealTek 8169SC/8110SC Single-chip Gigabit Ethernet> port 0x4000-0x40ff mem 0xf0100000-0xf01000ff irq 19 at device 4.0 on pci11
>>> re0: Chip rev. 0x18000000
>>> re0: MAC rev. 0x00000000
>>> miibus0:<MII bus> on re0
>>> rgephy0:<RTL8169S/8110S/8211B media interface> 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<FPU,VME,DE,PSE,TSC,MSR,PAE,MCE,CX8,APIC,SEP,MTRR,PGE,MCA,CMOV,PAT,PSE36,CLFLUSH,DTS,ACPI,MMX,FXSR,SSE,SSE2,SS,TM,PBE>
>>> Features2=0xe31d<SSE3,DTES64,MON,DS_CPL,TM2,SSSE3,CX16,xTPR,PDCM>
>>> AMD Features=0x20100800<SYSCALL,NX,LM>
>>> AMD Features2=0x1<LAHF>
>>> 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"
>
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4D4361AF.9090602>