lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 20:03:02 +0200 From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> To: Alexey Vlasov <renton@...ton.name> Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: Packet time delays on multi-core systems Le jeudi 30 septembre 2010 à 21:37 +0400, Alexey Vlasov a écrit : > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 02:44:29PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > Le jeudi 30 septembre 2010 ?? 16:23 +0400, Alexey Vlasov a ??crit : > > > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 08:33:52AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > > > Le jeudi 30 septembre 2010 ?? 10:24 +0400, Alexey Vlasov a ??crit : > > > > > Here I found some dude with the same problem: > > > > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/7/9/340 > > > > > > Well I put interrups from NIC, namely tx/rx query, to different > > > processors and got normal pings by adding LOG rule. > > > > > > I also found that overruns is constantly growing, I don't know if these are connected. > > > RX packets:2831439546 errors:0 dropped:134726 overruns:947671733 frame:0 > > > TX packets:2880849825 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 > > > > > Too early to be happy, concerning one rule- the situation got better, but still > there are some time delays. But adding one more rule: > -A INPUT -p all -m state --state INVALID -j LOG --log-prefix > "ipsec:IN-INVALID " > it got totally wrecked: > ... > 64 bytes from (10.0.2.17): icmp_seq=24 ttl=64 time=0.342 ms > 64 bytes from (10.0.2.17): icmp_seq=25 ttl=64 time=1868 ms > 64 bytes from (10.0.2.17): icmp_seq=26 ttl=64 time=1448 ms > 64 bytes from (10.0.2.17): icmp_seq=27 ttl=64 time=447 ms > 64 bytes from (10.0.2.17): icmp_seq=28 ttl=64 time=0.196 ms > ... > 100 packets transmitted, 100 received, 0% packet loss, time 99990ms > rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.108/39.068/1868.663/237.507 ms, pipe 2 > > # iptables -L -v -n > Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 601K packets, 475M bytes) > pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination > 275 11096 LOG all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state INVALID LOG flags 0 level 4 prefix `ipsec:IN-INVALID ' > > Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) > pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination > > Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 529K packets, 561M bytes) > pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination > 13979 839K LOG tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:80 flags:0x17/0x02 LOG flags 8 level 4 prefix `ipsec:SYN-OUTPUT-DROP ' > > > > Here goes the typical distribution of interrups on new servers: > > > CPU0 CPU1 CPU2 CPU3 ... CPU23 > > > 752: 11 0 0 0 ... 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth0 > > > 753: 2799366721 0 0 0 ... 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth0-rx3 > > > 754: 2821840553 0 0 0 ... 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth0-rx2 > > > 755: 2786117044 0 0 0 ... 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth0-rx1 > > > 756: 2896099336 0 0 0 ... 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth0-rx0 > > > 757: 1808404680 0 0 0 ... 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth0-tx3 > > > 758: 1797855130 0 0 0 ... 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth0-tx2 > > > 759: 1807222032 0 0 0 ... 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth0-tx1 > > > 760: 1820309360 0 0 0 ... 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth0-tx0 > > > > > > > echo 01 >/proc/irq/*/eth0-rx0/../smp_affinity > > echo 02 >/proc/irq/*/eth0-rx1/../smp_affinity > > echo 04 >/proc/irq/*/eth0-rx2/../smp_affinity > > echo 08 >/proc/irq/*/eth0-rx3/../smp_affinity > > > > > > cat /proc/irq/*/eth0-rx0/../smp_affinity > > cat /proc/irq/*/eth0-rx1/../smp_affinity > > cat /proc/irq/*/eth0-rx2/../smp_affinity > > cat /proc/irq/*/eth0-rx3/../smp_affinity > > The last test were made already concerning such rx queue binding: > # cat /proc/irq/60/smp_affinity > 001000 > # cat /proc/irq/61/smp_affinity > 010000 > # cat /proc/irq/62/smp_affinity > 080000 > # cat /proc/irq/63/smp_affinity > 800000 > Why 60, 61, 62, 63 ? This should be 753, 754, 755, 756 > Now ksoftirqd eats not only one processor but all oness where I assigned the IRQs. > > > > On the old ones: > > > CPU0 CPU1 CPU2 ... CPU8 > > > 502: 522320256 522384039 522327386 ... 522380267 PCI-MSI-edge eth0 > > > > > > > What network driver is it (newbox), was it (old box) ? > > newbox: > 01:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82575EB Gigabit Network > Connection (rev 02) > driver: igb > version: 1.3.16-k2 > firmware-version: 2.1-0 > bus-info: 0000:01:00.0 > > oldbox: > 05:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 80003ES2LAN Gigabit > Ethernet Controller (Copper) (rev 01) > driver: e1000e > version: 0.3.3.3-k6 > firmware-version: 1.0-0 > bus-info: 0000:05:00.0 > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists