|
|
|
|
|
by lrizzo
4368 days ago
|
|
netsend and other apps used in that comparison were not rate limited. Surely that test only measures system's overheads, but i put that disclaimer very clearly in all papers and talks (btw "which it isn't" suggests that you have different numbers so please let us know). Surely, sometimes these per-packet savings are irrelevant, but there are a number of use cases where this kind of savings matter a lot. This is true for netmap, dpdk, DNA and all other network-stack-bypass frameworks. On passing, people typically use the term 'os-bypass' but netmap relies on the OS for protection, synchronization, memory management etc -- all things that the OS does well and i find no reason to reinvent. |
|
As a test of max throughput, it is a horrible test. I don't have the motivation to prove it, but I would be surprised if more than 5% of the CPU load actually went towards networking, the rest time calculations and interval tests.