[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1302157012.2701.73.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 08:16:52 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Wei Gu <wei.gu@...csson.com>
Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>,
Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>
Subject: RE: Question on "net: allocate skbs on local node"
Le jeudi 07 avril 2011 à 07:16 +0200, Eric Dumazet a écrit :
> Le jeudi 07 avril 2011 à 06:58 +0200, Eric Dumazet a écrit :
> > Le jeudi 07 avril 2011 à 10:16 +0800, Wei Gu a écrit :
> > > Hi Eric,
> > > Testing with ixgbe Linux 2.6.38 driver:
> > > We have a little better thruput figure with this driver, but it looks
> > > not scalling at all, I always stressed one CPU core/24.
> > > And when look the perf report for ksoftirqd/24, the most cost function
> > > is still "_raw_spin_unlock_irqstore" and the IRQ/s is huge, it's
> > > somehow conflicts with desgin of NAPI. On linux 2.6.32 while the CPU
> > > was stressed the IRQ will descreased while the NAPI will running much
> > > on the polling mode. I don't know why on 2.6.38 the IRQ was keep
> > > increasing.
> >
> >
> > CC netdev and Intel guys, since they said it should not happen (TM)
> >
> > IF you dont use DCA (make sure ioatdma module is not loaded), how comes
> > alloc_iova() is called at all ?
> >
> > IF you use DCA, how comes its called, since the same CPU serves a given
> > interrupt ?
> >
> >
>
> But then, maybe you forgot to cpu affine IRQS ?
>
> High performance routing setup is tricky, since you probably want to
> disable many features that are ON by default : Most machines act as a
> end host.
>
>
Please dont send me anymore private mails, I do think the issue you have
is on a setup, not a particular optimization done in network stack.
Copy of your private mail :
> On 2.6.38, I got a lot of "rx_missed_errors" on NIC, which means the
> rx loop was really busy to get packet from the receiving ring. Usually
> in this case it shouldn't exit the softirqs and keep polling in order
> to decrease the initrs.
>
> On 2.6.32, I can Rx and Tx 2.3Mpps with no packet lost(error on NIC),
> but on 2.6.38 I can only reach 50kpps with a lot of
> "rx_missed_errors", and all the binding cpu core was 100% in SI. I
> don't think there was any optimizations on it.
I hope you understand there is something wrong with your setup ?
50.000 pps on a 64 cpu machine is a bad joke.
We can reach +10.000.000 on a 16 cpus one.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists