Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 15:50:21 +0200 From: Bernd Walter <ticso@cicely7.cicely.de> To: Jacques Fourie <jacques.fourie@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-arm@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Routing benchmarks Message-ID: <20080909135021.GR1147@cicely7.cicely.de> In-Reply-To: <be2f52430809090633o7b80f23y2749a055f61d5cb0@mail.gmail.com> References: <be2f52430809090633o7b80f23y2749a055f61d5cb0@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 03:33:30PM +0200, Jacques Fourie wrote: > Hi, > > I've performed some benchmark tests on my Gumstix Connex 400 (Intel > Xscale PXA 255 CPU clocked at 400MHz) with a netDuo expansion board. > This board has two smc network interfaces. I configure the gumstix as > a router and measure network throughput with netperf running on > seperate boxes on either side of the gumstix. My initial tests showed > a TCP throughput of 2Mbit/s. After adapting the smc driver to use DMA > this figure went up to 7Mbit/s. Although this is a significant > improvement, it still seems to be a bit slow. Does anyone have any > tips on how I can go about to try and figure out where the bottleneck > lies? Initial profiling showed that a significant amount of time was > spent doing memory to memory copies of data, but after the DMA change > profiling does not show any obvious culprits. I don't know the PXA255, but I do know the AT91RM9200 and I expect the PXA255 to be a bit faster. With the RM9200 I can get ~8Mbit/s routing PPPoE with NAT and small ipfw table. This is done with the internal MAC using VLAN, so there is also VLAN overhead. Plain routing should be faster. -- B.Walter <bernd@bwct.de> http://www.bwct.de Modbus/TCP Ethernet I/O Baugruppen, ARM basierte FreeBSD Rechner uvm.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20080909135021.GR1147>