| 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: <53FCB944.9060904@intel.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2014 09:43:48 -0700
From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>
To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
therbert@...gle.com, jhs@...atatu.com, hannes@...essinduktion.org,
edumazet@...gle.com, jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com,
rusty@...tcorp.com.au, dborkman@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Get rid of ndo_xmit_flush
On 08/26/2014 05:52 AM, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
>
> On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 12:13:47 +0200 Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 26 Aug 2014 08:28:15 +0200 Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com> wrote:
>>> On Mon, 25 Aug 2014 16:34:58 -0700 (PDT) David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Given Jesper's performance numbers, it's not the way to go.
>>>>
>>>> Instead, go with a signalling scheme via new boolean skb->xmit_more.
>>>
>>> I'll do benchmarking based on this new API proposal today.
>>
>> While establish an accurate baseline for my measurements. I'm
>> starting to see too much variation in my trafgen measurements.
>> Meaning that we unfortunately cannot use it to measure variations on
>> the nanosec scale.
>
> Thus, we need to find a better more accurate measurement tool than
> trafgen/af_packet.
>
> Changed my PPS monitor "ifpps-oneliner" to calculate the nanosec
> variation between the instant reading and the average. For TX also
> record the "max" and "min" variation value seen.
>
> This should give us a better (instant) picture of how accurate the
> measurement is.
>
> ifpps -clod eth5 -t 1000 | \
> awk 'BEGIN{txsum=0; rxsum=0; n=0; txvar=0; txvar_min=0; txvar_max=0; rxvar=0;} \
> /[[:digit:]]/ {txsum+=$11;rxsum+=$3;n++; \
> txvar=0; if (txsum/n>10 && $11>0) { \
> txvar=((1/(txsum/n)*10^9)-(1/$11*10^9)); \
> if (n>10 && txvar < txvar_min) {txvar_min=txvar}; \
> if (n>10 && txvar > txvar_max) {txvar_max=txvar}; \
> }; \
> rxvar=0; if (rxsum/n>10 && $3>0 ) { rxvar=((1/(rxsum/n)*10^9)-(1/$3*10^9))}; \
> printf "instant rx:%u tx:%u pps n:%u average: rx:%d tx:%d pps (instant variation TX %.3f ns (min:%.3f max:%.3f) RX %.3f ns)\n", $3, $11, n, rxsum/n, txsum/n, txvar, txvar_min, txvar_max, rxvar; \
> if (txvar > 2) {printf "WARNING instant variation high\n" } }'
>
>
> Nanosec variation with trafgen:
> -------------------------------
>
> As can be seen, the min and max nanosec variation with trafgen is
> higher than we would like:
>
> Results: trafgen
> (sudo ethtool -C eth5 rx-usecs 1)
> instant rx:0 tx:1566064 pps n:152 average: rx:0 tx:1564534 pps
> (instant variation TX 0.624 ns (min:-6.336 max:1.766) RX 0.000 ns)
>
> Results: trafgen
> (sudo ethtool -C eth5 rx-usecs 30)
> instant rx:0 tx:1576452 pps n:121 average: rx:0 tx:1575652 pps
> (instant variation TX 0.322 ns (min:-4.479 max:0.714) RX 0.000 ns)
>
>
> Switching to pktgen
> -------------------
>
> I suspect a more accurate measurement tool will be "pktgen", because
> we can cut out most of the things that can cause these variations
> (like kmem_cache and cache-hot variations, and most sched variations).
>
> The main problem with ixgbe is that, in this overload scenario, the
> performance is limited by the TX ring size and cleanup intervals, as
> described in:
> http://netoptimizer.blogspot.dk/2014/06/pktgen-for-network-overload-testing.html
> https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/pktgen.txt
>
> Results below: Try to determine which ixgbe ethtool setting gives the
> most stable PPS readings. Notice the TX "min" and "max" nanosec
> variations seen over the period. Sampling over approx 120 sec.
>
> The best setting seems to be:
> sudo ethtool -C eth5 rx-usecs 30
> sudo ethtool -G eth5 tx 512 #(default size)
>
> Pktgen tests are single CPU performance numbers, script based on:
> https://github.com/netoptimizer/network-testing/blob/master/pktgen/example01.sh
> with CLONE_SKB="100000" (and single flow, const port number 9/discard)
>
> Setting:
> sudo ethtool -G eth5 tx 512 #(Default setting)
> sudo ethtool -C eth5 rx-usecs 1 #(Default setting)
> Result pktgen:
> * instant rx:1 tx:3933892 pps n:120 average: rx:1 tx:3934182 pps
> (instant variation TX -0.019 ns (min:-0.047 max:0.016) RX 0.000 ns)
>
> The variation very small, but the performance is limited by the TX
> ring buffer being full most of the time, TX cleanup being too slow.
>
> Setting: (inc TX ring size)
> sudo ethtool -G eth5 tx 1024
> sudo ethtool -C eth5 rx-usecs 1 #(default setting)
> Result pktgen:
> * instant rx:1 tx:5745632 pps n:118 average: rx:1 tx:5748818 pps
> (instant variation TX -0.096 ns (min:-0.293 max:0.897) RX 0.000 ns)
>
> Setting:
> sudo ethtool -G eth5 tx 512
> sudo ethtool -C eth5 rx-usecs 20
> Result pktgen:
> * instant rx:1 tx:5765168 pps n:120 average: rx:0 tx:5782242 pps
> (instant variation TX -0.512 ns (min:-1.008 max:1.599) RX 0.000 ns)
>
> Setting:
> sudo ethtool -G eth5 tx 512
> sudo ethtool -C eth5 rx-usecs 30
> Result pktgen:
> * instant rx:1 tx:5920856 pps n:114 average: rx:1 tx:5918350 pps
> (instant variation TX 0.071 ns (min:-0.177 max:0.135) RX 0.000 ns)
>
> Setting:
> sudo ethtool -G eth5 tx 512
> sudo ethtool -C eth5 rx-usecs 40
> Result pktgen:
> * instant rx:1 tx:5958408 pps n:120 average: rx:0 tx:5947908 pps
> (instant variation TX 0.296 ns (min:-1.410 max:0.595) RX 0.000 ns)
>
> Setting:
> sudo ethtool -G eth5 tx 512
> sudo ethtool -C eth5 rx-usecs 50
> Result pktgen:
> * instant rx:1 tx:5966964 pps n:120 average: rx:1 tx:5967306 pps
> (instant variation TX -0.010 ns (min:-1.330 max:0.169) RX 0.000 ns)
>
> Setting:
> sudo ethtool -C eth5 rx-usecs 30
> sudo ethtool -G eth5 tx 1024
> Result pktgen:
> instant rx:0 tx:5846252 pps n:120 average: rx:1 tx:5852464 pps
> (instant variation TX -0.182 ns (min:-0.467 max:2.249) RX 0.000 ns)
>
>
My advice would be to disable all C states and P states (including
turbo) if possible, and try using idle=poll. Any processor frequency
and/or C state transitions will totally wreak havoc with trying to get
reliable results out of any performance test.
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