netdev - Re: HTB accuracy for high speed (and bonding)

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Sat, 23 May 2009 18:06:30 +0300
From:	Vladimir Ivashchenko <hazard@...ncoudi.com>
To:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: HTB accuracy for high speed (and bonding)

> > So, I got rid of bonding completely and instead configured PBR on Cisco
> > + Linux routing in such a way so that packet gets received and
> > transmitted using NICs connected to the same pair of cores with common
> > cache. 65-70% idle on all cores now, compared to 0-30% idle in worst
> > case scenarios before.
> 
> As a matter of fact I don't understand this bonding idea vs. smp: I
> guess Eric Dumazet wrote why it's wrong wrt. locking. I'm not an smp
> expert but I think the most efficient use is with separate NICs per
> cpu (so with separate HTB qdiscs if possible), or multiqueue NICs -

I tried the following scenario: 2 NICs used for receive + another 2 NICs 
used for transmit having HTB. Each NIC on a separate core. No bonding, 
just manual load balancing using IP routing.

The result was that RX cores would be 20% and 40% idle respectively, even 
though the amount of traffic they were receiving was roughly the same. 
The TX cores were idling at around 90%. 

I found this strange personally, but I'm completely ignorant in internals of
kernel operation.

-- 
Best Regards
Vladimir Ivashchenko
Chief Technology Officer
PrimeTel, Cyprus - www.prime-tel.com
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html