[openib-general] Re: Re: TSO and IPoIB performance degradation

[Matt Leininger]

On Mon, 2006-03-20 at 11:02 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> Quoting r. Matt Leininger <mlleinin at hpcn.ca.sandia.gov>:
> > Kernel                OpenIB    msi_x  netperf (MB/s)  
> > 2.6.16-rc5           in-kernel    1     367
> > 2.6.15               in-kernel    1     382
> > 2.6.14-rc4 patch 1   in-kernel    1     434 
> > 2.6.14-rc4           in-kernel    1     385 
> > 2.6.14-rc3           in-kernel    1     374 
> > 2.6.13.2             svn3627      1     386 
> > 2.6.13.2 patch 1     svn3627      1     446 
> > 2.6.13.2             in-kernel    1     394 
> > 2.6.13-rc3 patch 12  in-kernel    1     442 
> > 2.6.13-rc3 patch 1   in-kernel    1     450 
> > 2.6.13-rc3           in-kernel    1     395
> > 2.6.12.5-lustre      in-kernel    1     399  
> > 2.6.12.5 patch 1     in-kernel    1     464
> > 2.6.12.5             in-kernel    1     402 
> > 2.6.12               in-kernel    1     406 
> > 2.6.12-rc6 patch 1   in-kernel    1     470 
> > 2.6.12-rc6           in-kernel    1     407
> > 2.6.12-rc5           in-kernel    1     405 
> > 2.6.12-rc5 patch 1   in-kernel    1     474
> > 2.6.12-rc4           in-kernel    1     470 
> > 2.6.12-rc3           in-kernel    1     466 
> > 2.6.12-rc2           in-kernel    1     469 
> > 2.6.12-rc1           in-kernel    1     466
> > 2.6.11               in-kernel    1     464 
> > 2.6.11               svn3687      1     464 
> > 2.6.9-11.ELsmp       svn3513      1     425  (Woody's results, 3.6Ghz
> > EM64T) 
> > 
> 
> BTW, Matt, it might be interesting to compare
> 2.6.13-rc3 patch 1 against -rc1 and -rc2 with patch 1, to try and track
> down the last bit of performance degradation in IPoIB.
> 
> Could you look into this?

  Sure, but I'm not sure it will tell us that much more.

  - Matt