From nobody Sun Sep 15 17:44:51 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-net@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4X6Fmy35wzz5WV8H for ; Sun, 15 Sep 2024 17:45:06 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from zarychtam@plan-b.pwste.edu.pl) Received: from plan-b.pwste.edu.pl (plan-b.pwste.edu.pl [IPv6:2001:678:618::40]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "plan-b.pwste.edu.pl", Issuer "GEANT OV RSA CA 4" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4X6Fmw4YyVz4jZJ for ; Sun, 15 Sep 2024 17:45:04 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from zarychtam@plan-b.pwste.edu.pl) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=pass header.d=plan-b.pwste.edu.pl header.s=plan-b-mailer header.b="m1Q3I/xV"; dmarc=pass (policy=quarantine) header.from=plan-b.pwste.edu.pl; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of zarychtam@plan-b.pwste.edu.pl designates 2001:678:618::40 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=zarychtam@plan-b.pwste.edu.pl Received: from plan-b.pwste.edu.pl (zarychtam@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by plan-b.pwste.edu.pl (8.18.1/8.17.2) with ESMTPS id 48FHiqna044492 (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 15 Sep 2024 19:44:53 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from zarychtam@plan-b.pwste.edu.pl) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=plan-b.pwste.edu.pl; s=plan-b-mailer; t=1726422293; bh=iE7UYqWN8JbFKmNmmk7X5RpZp4ntYnmKtxTa0xlNmog=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To; b=m1Q3I/xVigS9tupIL3SYqtIIpE8/jzRYPwoZQ3uRPhPhqi4fhFSgOf8Avvw9NejGf JLnhk5fNJgstgBn0wj/LSYVdY0qILu2HJudaZe0mY9DCgBHpwZrpXYxXD47t7YDBZU E6F/S4PvgdSx8pgmoMzVt8tPQiv3R8N1iLCxUJUr9uIUQl4NiE9isYJW+uycO5MZTK cVtC7gbAXy/EUG7C3S7cZBjUCSefuyc/V5y4Dw3FRT1lSrkKbQL7ICt/s3eTEDk4N9 bi3iCnjsT9+AmI4yyma8kMPeV170+uNvKq5ZRSG4FKig5LFGfZRxORZFMKDde9HEf1 jaATdJLcE2tcg== Received: (from zarychtam@localhost) by plan-b.pwste.edu.pl (8.18.1/8.18.1/Submit) id 48FHiqtM044491; Sun, 15 Sep 2024 19:44:52 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from zarychtam) Date: Sun, 15 Sep 2024 19:44:51 +0200 From: Marek Zarychta To: Sad Clouds Cc: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Performance issues with vnet jails + epair + bridge Message-ID: References: <20240912181618.7895d10ad5ff2ebae9883192@gmail.com> List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <20240912181618.7895d10ad5ff2ebae9883192@gmail.com> X-Spamd-Bar: --- X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-3.99 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.99)[-0.988]; DMARC_POLICY_ALLOW(-0.50)[plan-b.pwste.edu.pl,quarantine]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+mx]; R_DKIM_ALLOW(-0.20)[plan-b.pwste.edu.pl:s=plan-b-mailer]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:206006, ipnet:2001:678:618::/48, country:PL]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[gmail.com]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-net@freebsd.org]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; DKIM_TRACE(0.00)[plan-b.pwste.edu.pl:+] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4X6Fmw4YyVz4jZJ Dnia Thu, Sep 12, 2024 at 06:16:18PM +0100, Sad Clouds napisał(a): > Hi, I'm using FreeBSD-14.1 and on this particular system I only have a > single physical network interface, so I followed instructions for > networking vnet jails via epair and bridge, e.g. > > devel > { > vnet; > vnet.interface = "e0b_devel"; > exec.prestart += "/jails/jib addm devel genet0"; > exec.poststop += "/jails/jib destroy devel"; > } > > The issue is bulk TCP performance throughput between this jail and the > host is quite poor, with one CPU spinning 100% in kernel and others > sitting mostly idle. > > It seems there is some lock contention somewhere, but I'm not sure if > this is around vnet, epair or bridge subsystems. Are there > other alternatives for vnet jails? Can anyone recommend specific > deployment scenarios? I've seen references to netgraph which could be > used with jails. Does it have better performance and scalability and > could replace epair and bridge combination? > > Thanks. Have you tried to use kernel built with "options RSS" ? From my experience it could help in some specific scenarios. -- Marek Zarychta