RE: Iperf-Netperf
Yeah, I know there is something fishy here... but that is what "sar"
"vmstat" etc., show when I run Iperf.
When I increase the streams from 1 to 3 it goes to 100% busy.
I get a BW of about 90Mbytes/sec for iperf and about 294 Mbytes/sec for
Netperf
-----------------------------------
O-PROFILE REPORT FOR IPERF 1 STREAM I/O SIZE 64
Even O-profile shows that the CPU is 99.9% idle.
samples % image name app name symbol
name
206322 99.9462 vmlinux vmlinux
mwait_idle
43 0.0208 vmlinux vmlinux
memmove
7 0.0034 vmlinux vmlinux
vgacon_save_screen
3 0.0015 e1000.ko e1000
e1000_clean
3 0.0015 e1000.ko e1000
e1000_xmit_frame
3 0.0015 oprofiled oprofiled (n
symbols)
3 0.0015 vmlinux vmlinux
do_page_fault
2 9.7e-04 ext3.ko ext3
ext3fs_dirhash
2 9.7e-04 ld-2.3.4.so ld-2.3.4.so
do_lookup_x
2 9.7e-04 libc-2.3.4.so libc-2.3.4.so
mbrtowc
2 9.7e-04 vim vim (no
symbols)
2 9.7e-04 vmlinux vmlinux
__do_softirq
2 9.7e-04 vmlinux vmlinux
add_softcursor
--------------------------------------
--------------------------------------
O-PROFILE REPORT FOR NETPERF 1 STREAM I/O SIZE 64(top few lines)
(Here the CPU is used 100%)
samples % image name app name symbol
name
822 7.5447 e1000.ko e1000
e1000_xmit_frame
815 7.4805 vmlinux vmlinux
tcp_transmit_skb
781 7.1684 vmlinux vmlinux
_raw_spin_lock
752 6.9022 vmlinux vmlinux tcp_sendmsg
542 4.9748 vmlinux vmlinux
_raw_read_unlock
528 4.8463 vmlinux vmlinux skb_clone
400 3.6714 vmlinux vmlinux
ip_queue_xmit
382 3.5062 e1000.ko e1000
e1000_clean_tx_irq
---------------------------------------
Any help is greatly appreciated!
-Thanks,
Samson
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-iperf-users --at-- dast.nlanr.net
[mailto:owner-iperf-users --at-- dast.nlanr.net] On Behalf Of Jonathon Exley
Sent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 3:59 PM
To: iperf-users --at-- dast.nlanr.net
Subject: RE: Iperf-Netperf
It's funny that you say Iperf is only using 1% of the CPU.
In my experience it uses 100%.
Jonathon.
________________________________
From: owner-iperf-users --at-- dast.nlanr.net
[mailto:owner-iperf-users --at-- dast.nlanr.net] On Behalf Of Sahadevan, Samson
joseph dev
Sent: Friday, 25 August 2006 10:40 a.m.
To: iperf-users --at-- dast.nlanr.net
Subject: Iperf-Netperf
Hi,
To give a better idea of Netperf-Iperf comparison.
The graph explains most of my concerns. (Have the same configurations as
they are taken from the same setup).
Why is Iperf not performing as well as Netperf for lower buffer sizes?
(Netperf utilizes the whole CPU (100%) to give this performance while if
Iperf keeps almost 99% of CPU idle)
Seeing Oprofile data it shows that Netperf spends almost
8% of CPU clock cycles on tcp_sendmsg(), tcp_transmit_skb(),
e1000_xmit_frame() and _raw_spin_lock()
6% of CPU clock cycles on skb_clone() and _raw_read_unlock.
The remaining are for negligible time duration.
Can we do some tweaking in the code to increase the throughput of Iperf?
Thanks for the help,
Samson
PLEASE NOTE: This email (including any attachments) is confidential,
and may be
protected by legal privilege and copyright. If you have received it in
error
please notify us immediately and delete it - it is unlawful to retain,
print,
distribute or reproduce it. We employ anti-virus software, but cannot
guarantee
emails are virus-free. Views expressed in this email may not be those of
the
originating organisation.