> -----Original Message----- > From: Nishit Shah [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 10:11 PM > To: Vick, Matthew > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [E1000-devel] problem with simplified balancing on 82574 > chips > > > Hi Matthew, > > Currently I am testing 82574 and 82571/2 chips with same traffic > in a forwarding path using, > > netperf client ---> machine with 82571/2/4 chips --> netperf > server with below commands, > > ./netperf -t UDP_STREAM -l 3600 -H <target_ip> -- -m 64 > ./netperf -T 2 -t TCP_STREAM -l 3600 -H <target_ip> > > In both the cases I see major drop in CPU utilization in top for > 82571/2 chips but not for 82574 chips. As mentioned I do see drop in > number of interrupts in vmstat. > > Rgds, > Nishit Shah.
Thank you for detailing the test procedure. What's the "base" case you're testing against for 82574, though? For example, are you leaving InterruptThrottleRate at the default value, are you setting it to 0, etc. You may not see much difference between the default InterruptThrottleRate (3 for dynamic conservative mode) and simplified mode. I'd recommend comparing against InterruptThrottleRate=0. Cheers, Matthew ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ E1000-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel To learn more about Intel® Ethernet, visit http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
