bad throughput performance on multiple systems: Re: Fwd: Re: Disappointing packets-per-second performance results on a Dell,PE R530

[Caraballo-vega, Jordan A. (GSFC-6062)[COMPUTER SCIENCE CORP]]

At the time of implementing the vcxl* interfaces we get very bad results.

packets  errs idrops      bytes    packets  errs      bytes colls drops
      629k  4.5k     0        66M       629k     0        66M     0     0
      701k  5.0k     0        74M       701k     0        74M     0     0
      668k  4.8k     0        70M       668k     0        70M     0     0
      667k  4.8k     0        70M       667k     0        70M     0     0
      645k  4.5k     0        68M       645k     0        68M     0     0
      686k  4.9k     0        72M       686k     0        72M     0     0

And by using just the cxl* interfaces we were getting about

            input        (Total)           output
   packets  errs idrops      bytes    packets  errs      bytes colls drops
      2.8M     0  1.2M       294M       1.6M     0       171M     0     0
      2.8M     0  1.2M       294M       1.6M     0       171M     0     0
      2.8M     0  1.2M       294M       1.6M     0       171M     0     0
      2.8M     0  1.2M       295M       1.6M     0       172M     0     0
      2.8M     0  1.2M       295M       1.6M     0       171M     0     0

These are our configurations for now. Any advice or suggestion will be
appreciated.

/etc/rc.conf configurations

ifconfig_cxl0="up"
ifconfig_cxl1="up"
ifconfig_vcxl0="inet 172.16.2.1/24 -tso -lro mtu 9000"
ifconfig_vcxl1="inet 172.16.1.1/24 -tso -lro mtu 9000"
gateway_enable="YES"

/boot/loader.conf configurations

# Chelsio Modules
t4fw_cfg_load="YES"
t5fw_cfg_load="YES"
if_cxgbe_load="YES"

# rx and tx size
dev.cxl.0.qsize_txq=8192
dev.cxl.0.qsize_rxq=8192
dev.cxl.1.qsize_txq=8192
dev.cxl.1.qsize_rxq=8192

# drop toecaps to increase queues
dev.t5nex.0.toecaps=0
dev.t5nex.0.rdmacaps=0
dev.t5nex.0.iscsicaps=0
dev.t5nex.0.fcoecaps=0

# Controls the hardware response to congestion.  -1 disables
# congestion feedback and is not recommended.  0 instructs the
# hardware to backpressure its pipeline on congestion.  This
# usually results in the port emitting PAUSE frames.  1 instructs
# the hardware to drop frames destined for congested queues. From cxgbe
dev.t5nex.0.cong_drop=1

# Saw these recomendations in Vicenzo email thread
hw.cxgbe.num_vis=2
hw.cxgbe.fl_pktshift=0
hw.cxgbe.toecaps_allowed=0
hw.cxgbe.nnmtxq10g=8
hw.cxgbe.nnmrxq10g=8

/etc/sysctl.conf configurations

# Turning off pauses
dev.cxl.0.pause_settings=0
dev.cxl.1.pause_settings=0
# John Jasen suggestion - March 24, 2017
net.isr.bindthreads=0
net.isr.maxthreads=24


On 3/18/17 1:28 AM, Navdeep Parhar wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 11:43:32PM -0400, John Jasen wrote:
>> On 03/17/2017 03:32 PM, Navdeep Parhar wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 12:21 PM, John Jasen <jjasen at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Yes.
>>>> We were hopeful, initially, to be able to achieve higher packet
>>>> forwarding rates through either netmap-fwd or due to enhancements based
>>>> off https://wiki.freebsd.org/ProjectsRoutingProposal
>>> Have you tried netmap-fwd?  I'd be interested in how that did in your tests.
>> We have. On this particular box, (11-STABLE, netmap-fwd fresh from git)
>> it took about 1.7m pps in, dropped 500k, and passed about 800k.
>>
>> I'm lead to believe that vcxl interfaces may yield better results?
> Yes, those are the ones with native netmap support.  Any netmap based
> application should use the vcxl interfaces.  If you used them on the
> main cxl interfaces you were running netmap in emulated mode.
>
> Regards,
> Navdeep