Re: 25/100 G performance on freebsd
- Reply: Santiago Martinez : "Re: 25/100 G performance on freebsd"
- In reply to: Santiago Martinez : "Re: 25/100 G performance on freebsd"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Sat, 13 Aug 2022 09:20:47 UTC
Santiago thanks for the help. I am curious about your vale setup. Do you have only internal bridges? Do you bridge the NIC interface or are doing L3? Afaik i am trying to dind what would be the most efficient way to use the 25GB interfaces whle isolating the services on them. I very hesitant of the approach and unsure if freebsd these days can fit the bill: * run isolated services over the 2x25G . would jails limit the bandwith? * possibly run bhyve services when linux or else is needed . Would using only L3 routing solve some performances issues? benoit On Wed, Aug 10, 2022 at 23:31, Santiago Martinez <sm@codenetworks.net> wrote: > Hi Benoit, sorry to hear that the SR-IOV still not working on your HW. > > Have you tested the last patch from Intel? > > Regarding Bhyve, you can use Vale switches (based on netmap). > On my machines, i get around ~33Gbps between VM (same local machine), sometimes going towards 40Gbps... ( These are basic tests with iperf3 and TSO/LRO enabled). > > @Michael Dexter is working on a document that contains configuration examples and test results for the different network backend available in bhyve. > > If you need help, let me know and we can set up a call. > Take care. > Santi > > On 8/8/22 08:57, Benoit Chesneau wrote: > >> For some reasons. I can’t use SR-IOV on my freebsd machines (HPE DL160 gen10) with latest 25G HPE branded cards. I opened tickets for that but since then no move happened. >> >> So I wonder id there is a good setup to use these cards with the virtualization. Which kind of performance should I expect using if_bridge? What if i am doing L3 routing instead using epair or tap (for bhyve). Would it work better? >> >> Any hint is welcome, >> >> Benoît