netdev - Re: [RFC] [PATCH net-next v5 0/3] r8169: Implement dynamic ASPM mechanism for recent 1.0/2.5Gbps Realtek NICs

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]

Message-ID: <CAAd53p409uhbor1ArZ=kfiMK2JRHVGVyYukDSSyDvFsVSs=ErQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 1 Oct 2021 12:17:26 +0800
From:   Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@...onical.com>
To:     Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org>
Cc:     Heiner Kallweit <hkallweit1@...il.com>,
        nic_swsd <nic_swsd@...ltek.com>,
        Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@...gle.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Anthony Wong <anthony.wong@...onical.com>,
        Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux PCI <linux-pci@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH net-next v5 0/3] r8169: Implement dynamic ASPM
 mechanism for recent 1.0/2.5Gbps Realtek NICs

On Sat, Sep 18, 2021 at 6:09 AM Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 16, 2021 at 11:44:14PM +0800, Kai-Heng Feng wrote:
> > The purpose of the series is to get comments and reviews so we can merge
> > and test the series in downstream kernel.
> >
> > The latest Realtek vendor driver and its Windows driver implements a
> > feature called "dynamic ASPM" which can improve performance on it's
> > ethernet NICs.
> >
> > Heiner Kallweit pointed out the potential root cause can be that the
> > buffer is too small for its ASPM exit latency.
>
> I looked at the lspci data in your bugzilla
> (https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=214307).
>
> L1.2 is enabled, which requires the Latency Tolerance Reporting
> capability, which helps determine when the Link will be put in L1.2.
> IIUC, these are analogous to the DevCap "Acceptable Latency" values.
> Zero latency values indicate the device will be impacted by any delay
> (PCIe r5.0, sec 6.18).
>
> Linux does not currently program those values, so the values there
> must have been set by the BIOS.  On the working AMD system, they're
> set to 1048576ns, while on the broken Intel system, they're set to
> 3145728ns.
>
> I don't really understand how these values should be computed, and I
> think they depend on some electrical characteristics of the Link, so
> I'm not sure it's *necessarily* a problem that they are different.
> But a 3X difference does seem pretty large.
>
> So I'm curious whether this is related to the problem.  Here are some
> things we could try on the broken Intel system:

Original network speed, tested via iperf3:
TX: ~255 Mbps
RX: ~490 Mbps

>
>   - What happens if you disable ASPM L1.2 using
>     /sys/devices/pci*/.../link/l1_2_aspm?

TX: ~670 Mbps
RX: ~670 Mbps

>
>   - If that doesn't work, what happens if you also disable PCI-PM L1.2
>     using /sys/devices/pci*/.../link/l1_2_pcipm?

Same as only disables l1_2_aspm.

>
>   - If either of the above makes things work, then at least we know
>     the problem is sensitive to L1.2.

Right now the downstream kernel disables ASPM L1.2 as workaround.

>
>   - Then what happens if you use setpci to set the LTR Latency
>     registers to 0, then re-enable ASPM L1.2 and PCI-PM L1.2?  This
>     should mean the Realtek device wants the best possible service and
>     the Link probably won't spend much time in L1.2.

# setpci -s 01:00.0 ECAP_LTR+4.w=0x0
# setpci -s 01:00.0 ECAP_LTR+6.w=0x0

Then re-enable ASPM L1.2, the issue persists - the network speed is
still very slow.

>
>   - What happens if you set the LTR Latency registers to 0x1001
>     (should be the same as on the AMD system)?

Same slow speed here.

Kai-Heng