Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 12:24:11 -0800 (PST) From: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> To: Attilio Rao <attilio@freebsd.org> Cc: Pawel Jakub Dawidek <pjd@freebsd.org>, Kip Macy <kip.macy@gmail.com>, Suleiman Souhlal <ssouhlal@freebsd.org>, freebsd-current@freebsd.org, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Mantaining turnstile aligned to 128 bytes in i386 CPUs Message-ID: <XFMail.20070116122411.jdp@polstra.com> In-Reply-To: <3bbf2fe10701160851r79b04464m2cbdbb7f644b22b6@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 16-Jan-2007 Attilio Rao wrote: > The patch: > http://users.gufi.org/~rookie/works/patches/ts-sq/ts-sq.diff > > The benchmark results: > http://users.gufi.org/~rookie/works/patches/ts-sq/ts-sq.benchmark > > The kernel options file: > http://users.gufi.org/~rookie/works/patches/ts-sq/CURRENT This is good stuff! I tried your patch on a performance-critical system that I've been working on. Without going into a lot of detail, it's a bunch of in-kernel code that blasts packets back and forth between pairs of gigabit interfaces. Userland isn't involved at all. Running 4 gigabit ports in this way on a Dell 1950 with 4 CPU cores running at 3.0 GHz, I got about 4% better performance (in terms of packets per second) using your patch. That's a pretty good improvement, considering that the design makes some effort to avoid lock contention. John
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?XFMail.20070116122411.jdp>