On Sat, Aug 23, 2025 at 09:29:36AM +0200, Kurt Kanzenbach wrote: > Also I couldn't really see a performance degradation with ntpperf.
I was testing with an I350, not I210. Could that make a difference? > In my > tests the IRQ variant reached an equal or higher rate. But sometimes I > get 'Could not send requests at rate X'. No idea what that means. That's ntpperf giving up as the HW is too slow to send requests at that rate (with a single process calling sendmmsg() in a loop). You can add the -l option to force ntpperf to continue, but the printed rate values will no longer be accurate, you would need to measure it by some other way, e.g. by monitoring the interface packet counters. -- Miroslav Lichvar
