[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <eecaaf82-e6cd-2b75-5756-006a70258a9f@applied-asynchrony.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2019 10:04:28 +0200
From: Holger Hoffstätte <holger@...lied-asynchrony.com>
To: Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
Realtek linux nic maintainers <nic_swsd@...ltek.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Sander Eikelenboom <linux@...elenboom.it>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] r8169: make use of xmit_more
On 8/8/19 10:08 PM, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
(..snip..)
>>>
>>> I was about to ask exactly that, whether you have TSO enabled. I don't know what
>>> can trigger the HW issue, it was just confirmed by Realtek that this chip version
>>> has a problem with TSO. So the logical conclusion is: test w/o TSO, ideally the
>>> linux-next version.
>>
>> So disabling TSO alone didn't work - it leads to reduced throughout (~70 MB/s in iperf).
>> Instead I decided to backport 93681cd7d94f ("r8169: enable HW csum and TSO"), which
>> wasn't easy due to cleanups/renamings of dependencies, but I managed to backport
>> it and .. got the same problem of reduced throughout. wat?!
>>
>> After lots of trial & error I started disabling all offloads and finally found
>> that sg (Scatter-Gather) enabled alone - without TSO - will lead to the throughput
>> drop. So the culprit seems 93681cd7d94f, which disabled TSO on my NIC, but left
>> sg on by default. This weas repeatable - switch on sg, throughput drop; turn it
>> off - smooth sailing, now with reduced buffers.
>>
>> I modified the relevant bits to disable tso & sg like this:
>>
>> /* RTL8168e-vl has a HW issue with TSO */
>> if (tp->mac_version == RTL_GIGA_MAC_VER_34) {
>> + dev->vlan_features &= ~(NETIF_F_ALL_TSO|NETIF_F_SG);
>> + dev->hw_features &= ~(NETIF_F_ALL_TSO|NETIF_F_SG);
>> + dev->features &= ~(NETIF_F_ALL_TSO|NETIF_F_SG);
>> }
>>
>> This seems to work since it restores performance without sg/tso by default
>> and without any additional offloads, yet with xmit_more in the mix.
>> We'll see whether that is stable over the next few days, but I strongly
>> suspect it will be good and that the hiccups were due to xmit_more/TSO
>> interaction.
So that didn't take long - got another timeout this morning during some
random light usage, despite sg/tso being disabled this time.
Again the only common element is the xmit_more patch. :(
Not sure whether you want to revert this right away or wait for 5.4-rc1
feedback. Maybe this too is chipset-specific?
> Thanks a lot for the analysis and testing. Then I'll submit the disabling
> of SG on RTL8168evl (on your behalf), independent of whether it fixes
> the timeout issue.
Got it, thanks!
Holger
Powered by blists - more mailing lists