From: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
To: "Richard B. Johnson" <root@chaos.analogic.com>
Cc: Linux kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Linux 2.4.1 network (socket) performance
Date: Sat, 1 Jan 2000 01:38:17 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20000101013817.B28@(none)> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.95.1010222110641.2828A-100000@chaos.analogic.com>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.95.1010222110641.2828A-100000@chaos.analogic.com>; from root@chaos.analogic.com on Thu, Feb 22, 2001 at 11:11:28AM -0500
Hi!
> Hello, I am trying to find the reason for very, very poor network
> performance with sustained data transfers on Linux 2.4.1. I found
> a work-around, but don't think user-mode code should have to provide
> such work-arounds.
>
> In the following, with Linux 2.4.1, on a dedicated 100/Base
> link:
>
> s = socket connected to DISCARD (null-sink) server.
>
> while(len)
> {
> stat = write(s, buf, min(len, MTU));
> /* Yes, I do check for an error */
> buf += stat;
> len -= stat;
> }
>
> Data length is 0x00010000 bytes.
>
> MTU Average trans rate Fastest trans rate
> ---- ----------------- -----------------
> 65536 0.468 Mb/s 0.902 Mb/s
> 32768 0.684 Mb/s 0.813 Mb/s
> 16384 2.989 Mb/s 3.121 Mb/s
> 8192 5.211 Mb/s 6.160 Mb/s
> 4094 8.212 Mb/s 9.101 Mb/s
> 2048 8.561 Mb/s 9.280 Mb/s
> 1024 7.250 Mb/s 7.500 Mb/s
> 512 4.818 Mb/s 5.107 Mb/s
>
> As you can see, there is a maximum data length that can be
> handled with reasonable speed from a socket. Trying to find
> out what that was, I discovered that the best MTU was 3924.
> I don't know why. It shows:
Looks like that's page_size - epsilon.
> MTU Average trans rate Fastest trans rate
> ---- ----------------- -----------------
> 3924 8.920 Mb/s 9.31 Mb/s
But even this is *not* reasonable speed for 100MBit ethernet!
> If the user's data length is higher than this, there is a 1/100th
> of a second wait between packets. The larger the user's data length,
> the more the data gets chopped up into 1/100th of a second intervals.
>
> It looks as though user data that can't fit into two Ethernet packets
> is queued until the next time-slice on a 100 Hz system. This severely
> hurts sustained data performance. The performance with a single
> 64k data buffer is abysmal. If it gets chopped up into 2048 byte
> blocks in user-space, it's reasonable.
>
> Both machines are Dual Pentium 600 MHz machines with identical eepro100
> Ethernet boards. I substituted, LANCE (Hewlett Packard), and 3COM boards
> (3c59x) with essentially no change.
Strange. Do you have interrupts working okay? [I'm able to get 4Mbit with
ne2000 hooked on timer IRQ, so this is not totally stupid Question.]
> Does this point out a problem? Or should user-mode code be required
Definitely problem.
> to chop up data lengths to something more "reasonable" for the kernel?
> If so, how does the user know what "reasonable" is?
--
Philips Velo 1: 1"x4"x8", 300gram, 60, 12MB, 40bogomips, linux, mutt,
details at http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/velo/index.html.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2001-03-01 20:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2001-02-22 16:11 Linux 2.4.1 network (socket) performance Richard B. Johnson
2000-01-01 1:38 ` Pavel Machek [this message]
[not found] <3A966FF1.2C9E5641@colorfullife.com>
2001-02-23 15:58 ` Richard B. Johnson
2001-02-26 23:53 ` David S. Miller
2001-02-27 11:59 ` Alan Cox
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='20000101013817.B28@(none)' \
--to=pavel@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=root@chaos.analogic.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).