* [Cerowrt-devel] peeling harder with cake
@ 2015-07-03 1:27 Dave Taht
2015-07-03 3:15 ` [Cerowrt-devel] [Cake] " Jonathan Morton
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Dave Taht @ 2015-07-03 1:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: cake, cerowrt-devel
I compared one of mikael's datasets with the post get-rid-of-atomic
AND peel harder version of cake...
Look like peeling harder is better. Also got more throughput for some reason.
http://snapon.lab.bufferbloat.net/~d/saving300usecpeelingharderwithcake.png
--
Dave Täht
worldwide bufferbloat report:
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/results/bufferbloat
And:
What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone?
https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/makewififast
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Cake] peeling harder with cake
2015-07-03 1:27 [Cerowrt-devel] peeling harder with cake Dave Taht
@ 2015-07-03 3:15 ` Jonathan Morton
2015-07-03 16:01 ` Dave Taht
0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Jonathan Morton @ 2015-07-03 3:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Dave Taht; +Cc: cake, cerowrt-devel
> On 3 Jul, 2015, at 04:27, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Also got more throughput for some reason.
Is the NIC doing software GSO or does it have hardware support? If the former, it would suggest that software GSO is a universally bad idea and should be excised. If the latter, GSO should be disabled full stop for this hardware, so we can stop fannying about with peeling.
- Jonathan Morton
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
* Re: [Cerowrt-devel] [Cake] peeling harder with cake
2015-07-03 3:15 ` [Cerowrt-devel] [Cake] " Jonathan Morton
@ 2015-07-03 16:01 ` Dave Taht
0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Dave Taht @ 2015-07-03 16:01 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jonathan Morton; +Cc: cake, cerowrt-devel
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 8:15 PM, Jonathan Morton <chromatix99@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 3 Jul, 2015, at 04:27, Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Also got more throughput for some reason.
>
> Is the NIC doing software GSO or does it have hardware support? If the former, it would suggest that software GSO is a universally bad idea and should be excised. If the latter, GSO should be disabled full stop for this hardware, so we can stop fannying about with peeling.
:) It is software GSO, and yes, given the 4.0 results for forwarding
on this platform, I would consider seriously cutting it down in size.
(say, 2 MTU, max, down from 64k, or less - should give better cache
behavior, too), That said, TSO/GSO/GRO is everywhere, and peeling,
needed. Take the intel ethernet chips, for starters.
But it would be best to experiment and benchmark, further.
>
> - Jonathan Morton
>
--
Dave Täht
worldwide bufferbloat report:
http://www.dslreports.com/speedtest/results/bufferbloat
And:
What will it take to vastly improve wifi for everyone?
https://plus.google.com/u/0/explore/makewififast
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-07-03 16:01 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-07-03 1:27 [Cerowrt-devel] peeling harder with cake Dave Taht
2015-07-03 3:15 ` [Cerowrt-devel] [Cake] " Jonathan Morton
2015-07-03 16:01 ` Dave Taht
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox