[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151210141825.GA27930@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 15:18:29 +0100
From: Otto Sabart <osabart@...hat.com>
To: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@....com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
Jirka Hladky <jhladky@...hat.com>,
Adam Okuliar <aokuliar@...hat.com>,
Kamil Kolakowski <kkolakow@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] net: performance regression on ixgbe (Intel 82599EB
10-Gigabit NIC)
Hi Rick,
> *) It is good to be binding netperf and netserver - helps with
> reproducibility, but why the two -T options? A brief look at src/netsh.c
> suggests it will indeed set the two binding options separately but that is
> merely a side-effect of how I wrote the code. It wasn't an intentional
> thing.
It's because of the way we generate arguments for netperf.
'-T 0, -T ,0' does the same as '-T 0,0', but the first option is more
convenient for us.
> *) Is irqbalance disabled and the IRQs set the same each time, or might
> there be variability possible there? Each of the five netperf runs will be
> a different four-tuple which means each may (or may not) get RSS hashed/etc
> differently.
The irqbalance is disabled on all systems.
Can you suggest, if there is a need to assign irqs manually? Which irqs
we should pin to which CPU?
> *) It is perhaps adding duct tape to already-present belt and suspenders,
> but is power-management set to a fixed state on the systems involved? (Since
> this seems to be ProLiant G7s going by the legends on the charts, either
> static high perf or static low power I would imagine)
Power management is set to OS-Control in bios, which effectively means,
that _bios_ does not do any power management at all.
> *) What is the difference before/after for the service demands? The netperf
> tests being run are asking for CPU utilization but I don't see the service
> demand change being summarized.
Unfortunatelly we does not have any summary chart for service demands,
we will add some shortly.
> *) Does a specific CPU on one side or the other saturate?
> (LOCAL_CPU_PEAK_UTIL, LOCAL_CPU_PEAK_ID, REMOTE_CPU_PEAK_UTIL,
> REMOTE_CPU_PEAK_ID output selectors)
We are sort of stuck in a stone age. We still use old fashion tcp/udp
migrated tests, but we plan to switch to omni.
> *) What are the processors involved? Presumably the "other system" is
> fixed?
In this case:
hp-dl380g7 - $ lscpu:
Architecture: x86_64
CPU op-mode(s): 32-bit, 64-bit
Byte Order: Little Endian
CPU(s): 24
On-line CPU(s) list: 0-23
Thread(s) per core: 2
Core(s) per socket: 6
Socket(s): 2
NUMA node(s): 2
Vendor ID: GenuineIntel
CPU family: 6
Model: 44
Model name: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5650 @ 2.67GHz
Stepping: 2
CPU MHz: 2660.000
BogoMIPS: 5331.27
Virtualization: VT-x
L1d cache: 32K
L1i cache: 32K
L2 cache: 256K
L3 cache: 12288K
NUMA node0 CPU(s): 0,2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,22
NUMA node1 CPU(s): 1,3,5,7,9,11,13,15,17,19,21,23
hp-dl385g7 - $ lscpu:
tecture: x86_64
CPU op-mode(s): 32-bit, 64-bit
Byte Order: Little Endian
CPU(s): 24
On-line CPU(s) list: 0-23
Thread(s) per core: 1
Core(s) per socket: 12
Socket(s): 2
NUMA node(s): 4
Vendor ID: AuthenticAMD
CPU family: 16
Model: 9
Model name: AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 6172
Stepping: 1
CPU MHz: 2100.000
BogoMIPS: 4200.39
Virtualization: AMD-V
L1d cache: 64K
L1i cache: 64K
L2 cache: 512K
L3 cache: 5118K
NUMA node0 CPU(s): 0,2,4,6,8,10
NUMA node1 CPU(s): 12,14,16,18,20,22
NUMA node2 CPU(s): 13,15,17,19,21,23
NUMA node3 CPU(s): 1,3,5,7,9,11
Thank you for your hints!
Ota
--
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