From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-iw0-f171.google.com (mail-iw0-f171.google.com [209.85.214.171]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority" (verified OK)) by huchra.bufferbloat.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08B00201728 for ; Sun, 29 May 2011 08:28:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by iwn8 with SMTP id 8so3725215iwn.16 for ; Sun, 29 May 2011 08:44:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=UFR+lTHkqNk1PRA+k14tp0CDbVT9GzV0p8ittq+xsPM=; b=W4Y6fgVCv6hGwyk7v+4YZSPQMTtQ74FrgcHQ4q8NUx1WKF8GnNkm0z0EF6XCxh5utO 1KFvxkgsX/bmIgukOrRL50qFsnPoha8q6AqvjJhdlkwwZQqpBW6as0cJj2ay0xK1U5aS WUOhcb6vaKFCeq5l+6Pamf+pq4C9cRPa88nRI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=lc1qKPZHUw0AAobsCKVwnvSupxyqTUWMFXrgYe1OVrpiyip8uk6FsZ0mzMALwaYQ3q k8nGorPw+Es4elJovY7ynDsB5nRdUYy+3/zW3ELqn4OFrCBV2LOmErD6mA+T1dtQeojV JcaVLzBJVZLWuRkMclfvm1yA1WxMslf1GP4aA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.231.74.7 with SMTP id s7mr4965582ibj.172.1306683871240; Sun, 29 May 2011 08:44:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.231.39.203 with HTTP; Sun, 29 May 2011 08:44:31 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <7ifwnxbjyn.fsf@lanthane.pps.jussieu.fr> References: <7ifwnxbjyn.fsf@lanthane.pps.jussieu.fr> Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 09:44:31 -0600 Message-ID: From: Dave Taht To: Juliusz Chroboczek Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd6b244faa1a004a46c0bb1 Cc: bloat Subject: Re: [Bloat] tiny monsters: multicast packets X-BeenThere: bloat@lists.bufferbloat.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: General list for discussing Bufferbloat List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 29 May 2011 15:28:43 -0000 --000e0cd6b244faa1a004a46c0bb1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Juliusz Chroboczek wro= te: > > Result - 130+Mbit performance on iperf on the lan (up from 60Mbit), > > which is still pretty low > > Are you seeing high CPU load in interrupt context? (Run top.) > > Yes. 99% sirq. Screenshot: http://www.bufferbloat.net/attachments/download/33/routertest.png The one in green is the one 'routing', the others (3 out of the 4) are the ones generating traffic with iperf. -- Juliusz > --=20 Dave T=E4ht SKYPE: davetaht US Tel: 1-239-829-5608 http://the-edge.blogspot.com --000e0cd6b244faa1a004a46c0bb1 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Juliusz= Chroboczek <jch= @pps.jussieu.fr> wrote:
> Result - 130+Mbit performance on iperf on the lan (u= p from 60Mbit),
> which is still pretty low

Are you seeing high CPU load in interrupt context? =A0(Run top.)


Yes. 99% sirq.
Screenshot:

=A0http://www.bufferbloat.net/attachments/downlo= ad/33/routertest.png

The one in green is the one 'routing', the others (3 out of the= 4) are the ones generating traffic with iperf.

-- Juliusz



--
Dave T=E4ht
S= KYPE: davetaht
US Tel: 1-239-829-5608
http://the-edge.blogspot.com
--000e0cd6b244faa1a004a46c0bb1--