On 02/27/2013 12:40 PM, Eliezer Tamir wrote: > On 27/02/2013 21:58, Rick Jones wrote: >> On 02/27/2013 09:55 AM, Eliezer Tamir wrote: >>> >>> Performance numbers: >>> Kernel Config C3/6 rx-usecs TCP UDP >>> 3.8rc6 typical off adaptive 37k 40k >>> 3.8rc6 typical off 0* 50k 56k >>> 3.8rc6 optimized off 0* 61k 67k >>> 3.8rc6 optimized on adaptive 26k 29k >>> patched typical off adaptive 70k 78k >>> patched optimized off adaptive 79k 88k >>> patched optimized off 100 84k 92k >>> patched optimized on adaptive 83k 91k >>> *rx-usecs=0 is usually not useful in a production environment. >> >> I would think that latency-sensitive folks would be using rx-usecs=0 in >> production - at least if the NIC in use didn't have low enough latency >> with its default interrupt coalescing/avoidance heuristics. > > It will only work well if you have no bulk traffic on the same port as the > low latency traffic at all.
Have you done any tests for bulk throughput with busy-poll? Yes, it will eat a core, but that might be worth it in some cases if there was significant throughput increase... Thanks, Ben -- Ben Greear <gree...@candelatech.com> Candela Technologies Inc http://www.candelatech.com ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_feb _______________________________________________ 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
