netdev - Re: [Question] TCP stack performance decrease since 3.14

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:	Wed, 15 Apr 2015 17:38:21 -0400
From:	rapier <rapier@....edu>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Question] TCP stack performance decrease since 3.14



On 4/15/15 5:01 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 2015-04-15 at 15:31 -0400, rapier wrote:
>> All,
>>
>> First, my apologies if this came up previously but I couldn't find
>> anything using a keyword search of the mailing list archive.
>>
>> As part of the on going work with web10g I need to come up with baseline
>> TCP stack performance for various kernel revision. Using netperf and
>> super_netperf* I've found that performance for TCP_CC, TCP_RR, and
>> TCP_CRR has decreased since 3.14.
>>
>> 	3.14	3.18	4.0 	decrease %
>> TCP_CC	183945	179222	175793	4.4%
>> TCP_RR	594495	585484	561365	5.6%
>> TCP_CRR	98677	96726	93026	5.7%
>>
>> Stream tests have remained the same from 3.14 through 4.0.
>>
>> All tests were conducted on the same platform from clean boot with stock
>> kernels.
>>
>> So my questions are:
>>
>> Has anyone else seen this or is this a result of some weirdness on my
>> system or artifact of my tests?
>>
>> If others have seen this or is just simply to be expected (from new
>> features and the like) is it due to the TCP stack itself or other
>> changes in the kernel?
>>
>> If so, is there anyway to mitigate the effect of this via stack tuning,
>> kernel configuration, etc?
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Chris
>>
>>
>> * The above results are the average of 10 iterations of super_netperf
>> for each test. I can run more iterations to verify the results but it
>> seem consistent. The number of parallel processes for each test was
>> tuned to produce the maximum test result. In other words, enough to push
>> things but not enough to cause performance hits due to being
>> cpu/memory/etc bound. If anyone wants the full results and test scripts
>> just let me know.
>> --
>
> Make sure you do not hit a c-state issue.
>
> I've seen improvements in the stack translate to longer wait times, and
> cpu takes longer to exit deep c-state.

I believe I properly disabled CPU power management in the bios (the 
lenovo bios isn't terribly clear on this). I then booted with 
processor.max_cstate=1 idle=poll (also tried with 
intel_idle.max_cstate=0 and combinatiosn thereof). Still seeing reduced 
performance in comparison to 3.14. I'll try using /dev/cpu_dma_latency 
instead when I get in tomorrow. If you have other suggestions to verify 
c-state I'd be happy to hear them.

As a note, 3.2 tests as being more than 18% faster in the above categories.

Chris
--
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