On Wed, 28 Sep 2011 11:39:54 -0700 Denis Radovanovic <denis.radovano...@riverbed.com> wrote: > We are currently testing small packet performance on 82574, comparing > it to 82571. Initial pktgen measurements have shown a significant > difference in performance that is the most visible when running > bidirectional traffic with 256 byte packets. > > Looking at the e1000e driver, we noticed that flag FLAG2_DMA_BURST is > enabled for 82571 and 82572 but it is not enabled for 82574. After > enabling the flag, the 82574 performance significantly improved, > approaching the one on 82571.
At the time the feature was implemented we didn't have the bandwidth to validate it on other parts besides 82571/2 As it stands, yes you can enable it, but there will likely be some bugs that you will run into that we already know about but don't fully have fixed in the code. The bugs might result in tx hangs or other issues. I do agree that there are significant performance gains to be had via this feature, if the bugs can all be worked out. if this is a feature that you would really like implemented please use your Intel Field Agent or TME contacts in order to document your requirement so we can consider it for future releases. Thanks, Jesse ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ All the data continuously generated in your IT infrastructure contains a definitive record of customers, application performance, security threats, fraudulent activity and more. Splunk takes this data and makes sense of it. Business sense. IT sense. Common sense. http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2dcopy1 _______________________________________________ E1000-devel mailing list E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel® Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
