Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 6 Dec 2006 10:56:42 +0000
From:      David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie>
To:        Max Laier <max@love2party.net>
Cc:        Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@icir.org>, freebsd-ipfw@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: Better "hash_packet6"
Message-ID:  <20061206105642.GB72189@walton.maths.tcd.ie>
In-Reply-To: <200612060451.58473.max@love2party.net>
References:  <200612052010.36789.max@love2party.net> <20061205161744.A48319@xorpc.icir.org> <200612060451.58473.max@love2party.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Dec 06, 2006 at 04:51:51AM +0100, Max Laier wrote:
> I tried the reference machines (see hacked up attachment):
> 78x ia64
> 40x amd64
> 60x p3
> 16x p4

> I don't have my Soekris set up, so if somebody could give it a try.

On my 4.11 Soekris 4501 box, the test shows about 70x for gcc -O2
and 40x for gcc -O. As these are worst-case figures, it would be
interesting to see how CPU usage is impacted for forwarding high
packet rates. My feeling is that this difference would be lost in
the noise of branches, memory accesses and fielding interrupts, but
it would be interesting to measure.

	David.



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061206105642.GB72189>