Hi,
Yes, for 1500 MTU these aren’t too bad. One thing to note, using the
TCP_STREAM option does not take advantage of zero-copy and possibly checksum
offload on the transmit side. You should use the TCP_SENDFILE option for that.
We typically use options such as:
netperf -c -C -H 192.168.1.1 -t TCP_STREAM -- -s131072 -S131072
-m65536
netperf -c -C -H 192.168.1.1 -t UDP_STREAM -- -s131072 -S131072
-m8192 (if using jumbo frames of 8982)
-Rick
________________________________
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of MingLiu
Sent: Thursday, November 08, 2007 2:32 AM
To: kentaro; linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
Subject: RE: ML405 gigabit ethernet with kernel 2.6.23
Dear Kentaro,
> -------------------------------------------------------------
> "netperf -H 192.168.1.1 -t TCP_STREAM" 110 Mbps
> "netperf -H 192.168.1.1 -t UDP_STREAM" 210 Mbps
> -------------------------------------------------------------
Are these results the ones with or without Jumbo-frame enabled? If no, they are
quite good I think. The results from Montavista probably are the ones with
Jumbo-frame enabled.
For anybody who has interest on this topic, I have recently an accepted paper
which has part of the content on this. The link is
http://web.it.kth.se/~mingliu/publications/co_design(icfpt07).pdf and in 6.2
section, I listed our measurement results. 300Mbps for TCP and 400Mbps for UDP,
with Jumbo-frame enabled. Unfortunately I did not explain the details and
detailed configurations on our case. So these results are only for your
reference.
BR
Ming
________________________________
用 Windows Live Spaces 展示个性自我，与好友分享生活！ 了解更多信息！ <http://spaces.live.com/?page=HP>
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-embedded mailing list
Linuxppc-embedded@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-embedded
