From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Dumazet Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v2] tcp: TCP Small Queues Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 09:34:19 +0200 Message-ID: <1342078459.3265.8244.camel@edumazet-glaptop> References: <1340945457.29822.7.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <1341396687.2583.1757.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <20120709.000834.1182150057463599677.davem@davemloft.net> <1341845722.3265.3065.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <1341933215.3265.5476.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <1342019518.3265.8116.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <4FFDC985.6050805@hp.com> <1342050592.3265.8195.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: nanditad@google.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, mattmathis@google.com, codel@lists.bufferbloat.net, ncardwell@google.com, David Miller To: Rick Jones Return-path: In-Reply-To: <1342050592.3265.8195.camel@edumazet-glaptop> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: codel-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net Errors-To: codel-bounces@lists.bufferbloat.net List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Thu, 2012-07-12 at 01:49 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote: > The 10Gb receiver is a net-next kernel, but the 1Gb receiver is a 2.6.38 > ubuntu kernel. They probably have very different TCP behavior. I tested TSQ on bnx2x and 10Gb links. I get full rate even using 65536 bytes for the /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_limit_output_bytes tunable OMNI Send TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to 10.246.8.37 () port 0 AF_INET : histogram Local Remote Local Elapsed Throughput Throughput Local Local Remote Remote Local Remote Service Send Socket Recv Socket Send Time Units CPU CPU CPU CPU Service Service Demand Size Size Size (sec) Util Util Util Util Demand Demand Units Final Final % Method % Method 1606536 2097152 16384 20.00 9411.12 10^6bits/s 2.40 S 4.27 S 0.502 0.892 usec/KB