[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <565E41B8.1080206@cumulusnetworks.com>
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 16:56:24 -0800
From: David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>
To: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@....com>,
Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ipsec impact on performance
On 12/1/15 10:17 AM, Rick Jones wrote:
> On 12/01/2015 09:59 AM, Sowmini Varadhan wrote:
>> But these are all still relatively small things - tweaking them
>> doesnt get me significantly past the 3 Gbps limit. Any suggestions
>> on how to make this budge (or design criticism of the patch) would
>> be welcome.
>
> What do the perf profiles show? Presumably, loss of TSO/GSO means an
> increase in the per-packet costs, but if the ipsec path significantly
> increases the per-byte costs...
>
> Short of a perf profile, I suppose one way to probe for per-packet
> versus per-byte would be to up the MTU. That should reduce the
> per-packet costs while keeping the per-byte roughly the same.
Using iperf3 and AH with NULL algorithm between 2 peers connected by a
10G link.
Without AH configured I get a steady 9.9 Gbps with iperf3 consuming
about 55% cpu.
With AH I get ~1.5 Gbps with MTU at 1500:
[ 4] 0.00-1.01 sec 160 MBytes 1.33 Gbits/sec 23 905 KBytes
[ 4] 1.01-2.00 sec 211 MBytes 1.79 Gbits/sec 0 996 KBytes
iperf3 runs about 60% CPU and ksoftirqd/2 is at 86%.
Bumping the MTU to 9000:
[ 4] 3.00-4.00 sec 914 MBytes 7.67 Gbits/sec 260 1.01 MBytes
[ 4] 4.00-5.00 sec 1012 MBytes 8.49 Gbits/sec 0 1.23 MBytes
[ 4] 5.00-6.00 sec 1.15 GBytes 9.88 Gbits/sec 0 1.23 MBytes
At this rate iperf3 was at 95% CPU and ksoftirqd was not relevant.
--
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