Questions on processing smaller frame size
Siquijor Philips
siquijorphilips at gmail.com
Wed Feb 25 04:39:17 PST 2009
Hello Ivan,
This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156)
--------------enig69E41D4C44B97AD296C94242
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Siquijor Philips wrote:
> Hello Eugene,
>=20
>> Traffic bandwidth does not matter (or much less), PPS rate matters.
>> Packets drop due to high pps rate. Higher packet size, lesser pps
>> saturates link and pps just can't grow high. It can with smaller packe=
ts.
>>
>=20
> All the test scenarios here are bombarded with 1-Gig of network
> traffic. When packet drops due to high pps rate, meaning to say that
> the current FreeBSD system can't still handle this kind of situation
> with high packet rate?=20
> Not unlikely. See other similar findings by other users, usually also
> with em cards.
Ok, let me check.
> Or just it depends on your hardware? I just
> can't imagine that with 2x quad-core system processing on high packet
> rate, average CPU utilization consumes a total of 98%.
>Total across all CPUs?
With 64-byte and 128-byte frame, the total average CPU utilization
will vary from 92-98%. Below is one of the top output. CPU # 6,7,5,4
and 0 are in 0% idle state already. By default, Chelsio NIC were using
MSI/MSI-X interrupt on multiple RX/TX queues.
# top -S
PID USERNAME THR PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE C TIME WCPU COMMAND
338 root 1 -68 - 0K 16K CPU7 1 639:53 98.93% irq262: cxgbc
340 root 1 -68 - 0K 16K CPU4 0 631:19 98.19% irq264: cxgbc
337 root 1 -68 - 0K 16K CPU6 3 642:28 98.10% irq261: cxgbc
339 root 1 -68 - 0K 16K RUN 1 616:07 96.63% irq263: cxgbc
336 root 1 -68 - 0K 16K CPU3 2 621:11 90.33% irq260: cxgbc
335 root 1 -68 - 0K 16K CPU0 2 633:18 89.50% irq259: cxgbc
334 root 1 -68 - 0K 16K CPU1 3 642:27 88.87% irq258: cxgbc
333 root 1 -68 - 0K 16K CPU5 1 648:13 88.57% irq257: cxgbc
341 root 1 -83 - 0K 16K RUN 0 157:14 13.53% cxgbsp
16 root 1 171 ki31 0K 16K RUN 1 484:55 8.59% idle: cpu1
15 root 1 171 ki31 0K 16K RUN 2 483:39 7.76% idle: cpu2
14 root 1 171 ki31 0K 16K RUN 3 490:02 7.37% idle: cpu3
11 root 1 171 ki31 0K 16K RUN 6 485:50 0.00% idle: cpu6
10 root 1 171 ki31 0K 16K RUN 7 484:51 0.00% idle: cpu7
12 root 1 171 ki31 0K 16K RUN 5 475:38 0.00% idle: cpu5
13 root 1 171 ki31 0K 16K RUN 4 412:14 0.00% idle: cpu4
17 root 1 171 ki31 0K 16K RUN 0 409:06 0.00% idle: cpu0
342 root 1 -83 - 0K 16K RUN 4 155:04 0.00% cxgbsp
> Try reducing the number of CPUs, it might help by reducing contention.
Ok, I'll try.
Regards,
Siquijor
--------------enig69E41D4C44B97AD296C94242
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFJpSIBldnAQVacBcgRAvGvAJ99YslOqGaklehf6uQjLrAEm/hJ6gCgyTUd
rf3LDBNfsymm+jxbN0WHyU0=
=mjmo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--------------enig69E41D4C44B97AD296C94242--
More information about the freebsd-net
mailing list