| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <4F8D93E1.9090000@intel.com> Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 09:01:37 -0700 From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com> To: jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com CC: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, "Skidmore, Donald C" <donald.c.skidmore@...el.com>, Greg Rose <gregory.v.rose@...el.com>, John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>, Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [BUG] ixgbe: something wrong with queue selection ? On 04/17/2012 02:16 AM, Jeff Kirsher wrote: > On Tue, 2012-04-17 at 11:06 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote: >> Hi guys >> >> I have bad feelings with ixgbe and its multiqueue selection. >> >> On a quad core machine (Q6600), I get lots of reorderings on a single >> TCP stream. >> >> >> Apparently packets happily spread on all available queues, instead of a >> single one. >> >> This defeats GRO at receiver and TCP performance is really bad. >> >> # ethtool -S eth5|egrep "x_queue_[0123]_packets" ; taskset 1 netperf -H >> 192.168.99.1 ; ethtool -S eth5|egrep "x_queue_[0123]_packets" >> tx_queue_0_packets: 24 >> tx_queue_1_packets: 26 >> tx_queue_2_packets: 32 >> tx_queue_3_packets: 16 >> rx_queue_0_packets: 11 >> rx_queue_1_packets: 47 >> rx_queue_2_packets: 27 >> rx_queue_3_packets: 22 >> MIGRATED TCP STREAM TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to >> 192.168.99.1 (192.168.99.1) port 0 AF_INET >> Recv Send Send >> Socket Socket Message Elapsed >> Size Size Size Time Throughput >> bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec >> >> 87380 16384 16384 10.00 3866.43 >> tx_queue_0_packets: 1653201 >> tx_queue_1_packets: 608000 >> tx_queue_2_packets: 541382 >> tx_queue_3_packets: 536543 >> rx_queue_0_packets: 434703 >> rx_queue_1_packets: 137444 >> rx_queue_2_packets: 131023 >> rx_queue_3_packets: 128407 >> >> # ip ro get 192.168.99.1 >> 192.168.99.1 dev eth5 src 192.168.99.2 >> cache ipid 0x438b rtt 4ms rttvar 4ms cwnd 57 reordering 127 >> >> # lspci -v -s 02:00.0 >> 02:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82599EB 10-Gigabit >> SFI/SFP+ Network Connection (rev 01) >> Subsystem: Intel Corporation Ethernet Server Adapter X520-2 >> Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 16 >> Memory at f1100000 (64-bit, prefetchable) [size=512K] >> I/O ports at b000 [size=32] >> Memory at f1200000 (64-bit, prefetchable) [size=16K] >> Capabilities: [40] Power Management version 3 >> Capabilities: [50] MSI: Enable- Count=1/1 Maskable+ 64bit+ >> Capabilities: [70] MSI-X: Enable+ Count=64 Masked- >> Capabilities: [a0] Express Endpoint, MSI 00 >> Capabilities: [100] Advanced Error Reporting >> Capabilities: [140] Device Serial Number 00-1b-21-ff-ff-4a-fe-54 >> Capabilities: [150] Alternative Routing-ID Interpretation (ARI) >> Capabilities: [160] Single Root I/O Virtualization (SR-IOV) >> Kernel driver in use: ixgbe >> Kernel modules: ixgbe >> >> > Adding Don Skidmore and Alex Duyck... This is probably the result of ATR and the load balancer on the system. What is likely happening is that the netperf process is getting moved from CPU to CPU, and this is causing the transmit queue to change. Once this happens the ATR will cause the receive queue to change in order to follow the transmitting process. One thing you might try is using the "-T" option in netperf to see if the behaviour occurs if the process is bound to a specific CPU. Another thing you might try would be to disable ATR by enabling ntuple. You should be able to do that with "ethtool -K eth5 ntuple on". Thanks, Alex -- 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