Routing enhancement - reduce routing table locking

[K. Macy]

400kpps is not a large enough measure to reach any conclusions. A
system like that should be able to push at least 2.3Mpps with
flowtable. I'm not saying that what you've done is not an improvement,
but rather that you're hitting some other bottleneck. The output of
pmc and LOCK_PROFILING might be insightful.

Thanks,
Kip

On Mon, Apr 18, 2011 at 7:12 PM, Ingo Flaschberger <if at xip.at> wrote:
>
>> It would be great to see flowtable going back to its intended use.
>> However, I would be surprised if this actually scales to Mpps. I don't
>> have any high end hardware at the moment to test, what is the highest
>> packet rate you've seen? i.e. simply generating small packets.
>
> Currently I have no tests available, but I have seen at a appliance with:
> Intel Q35
> Quad Core cpu
> Intel em desktop pcie cards
>
> ~ 200mbit 64byte packets - ~ 400kpps without packetloss.
>
> Without patch flowtable and fastforward had the same speed as flowtable,
> fastfoward and standard forward.
>
> That means, with the patch the standard forward patch had the same speed as
> the fastforward path.
>
> It seems, I'm hitting some other speedlimits at my system, so there was no
> real difference between flowtable, fastforward with and without the patch.
>
> I would be great if someone could load a system with a full tables (400k
> routes) and do some tests at 10gbe speed.
>
> Kind regards,
>        Ingo Flaschberger
>
> _______________________________________________
> freebsd-net at freebsd.org mailing list
> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
>