Brian, Thanks! That's exactly the type of info I'm looking for. I've been using a Spirent/SMARTBITS SMB200 to bash any ppc hardware I can get my hands on in the lab. But our current assortment falls either into the low end or the really high end. We are working on a new project using an 8245 @400MHz; of course, the HW is already half baked but new features keep creeping into the project-- you know the drill. Hence my queries regarding what the mid range ppc stuff can do.
Thanks and regards. > > The performance on 4xx is dependent on how much work > you want to do in the ethernet driver. > > A (nearly) stock kernel will be able to forward 64 > byte packets at around 15,000 pps on 200MHz 405GP. > The interrupts burn alot of CPU cycles. If you > implement a timer-based interrupt mitigation scheme > using the FIT timer interrupt to clean out the RX and > TX rings, you will be able to hit about 35K to 40K > pps. On top of that, you can implement > CONFIG_NET_FASTROUTE in the driver, bypassing most of > the IP stack. After doing this you will get a maximum > sustained throughput of around 65K pps. > > These numbers were measured on a 200MHz 405GP w/ > 100MHz SDRAM. The on-chip ethernet was slightly > faster than the 82559. > > Large packet performance is not an issue, and you > should be able to saturate the 100mbps link with 1500 > byte packets. > > Regards, > Brian > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: linuxppc user [mailto:linuxppc at opqua.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2003 8:22 PM >> To: linuxppc-embedded at lists.linuxppc.org >> Subject: RE: routing performance w/embedded linux on > ppc? >> >> >> >> Stephen, >> >> Thanks for the follow-up. Do you have any numbers > for "lesser" >> processors than the 750, e.g. the 8245/8240 or the > 405GP? >> >> Thanks again and regards. >> >> >> >> > We sustain ~71MB/s routing packets in the > following manner. >> > >> > >> > > =====[GbE]=====>[BCM5691]==[GbE]==>[MV64360/PPC750FX] > {routing here} >> > || >> > || [GbE] >> > [BCM5691]<========== >> > || >> > || [GbE] >> > || >> > > ===========>[MV64360/PPC750FX] {destination} >> > >> > If you want to see a P4 at 2GHz+ brought to it's > knees, >> perform a benchmark >> > such as nbench and throw 80B packets at it at > ~100,000 >> packets/s or so. >> > >> > An 800MHz PPC750FX/MV64360 combo barely even > showed a >> performance hit >> > whether the packets were incoming or not. >> > >> > >> > Stephen B. Johnson >> > Sr. Applications Engineer, Global Accounts >> > Artesyn Communication Products >> > 8310 Excelsior Drive >> > Madison, Wisconsin 53717 >> > >> > phone 800-356-9602 >> > >> > NASDAQ: ATSN >> > >> > >> > -----Original Message----- >> > >> > Folks, >> > >> > There seems to be a plethora of data regarding > linux IP routing >> > performance (e.g., forwarding rate in packets per > sec) on x86 >> > platforms. This is likely because x86 boxen are > all that typical >> > university students have in front of them. :*) >> > >> > I'm looking for some papers, pointers, or whatever > regarding linux >> > routing performance on midrange embedded ppc > hardware, for example >> > the moto8245 and ibm405GP (as used inside the > Xilinx Virtex II Pro). >> > >> > Basically our application boils down to a 4 port > router, and we'd >> > like to get a handle on what kind of aggregate > throughput and pps >> > we would be able to handle using these types of > ppc processors at >> > ~266/300 MHz. Yes, the 8260, and 7xx, et al, are > faster, but our >> > equipment cost profile is very restrictive. >> > >> > example config: >> > >> > i82559 | <- PCI -> [mpc8245 @ 300MHz] >> > i82559 | >> > i82559 | >> > i82559 | >> > >> > There is other stuff hanging off of PortX and so > forth, but that's >> > what the datapath looks like. >> > >> > Thanks for any leads/hints/ideas/etc. I'll > summarize back. >> >> > > > > ** Sent via the linuxppc-embedded mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/
