Hi Grant, On 04/01/2017 02:01 AM, Grant Zhang wrote: > Hi Emeric, > > Sorry for my delayed reply. > > > On 03/28/2017 01:47 AM, Emeric Brun wrote: >> >>> This is an atom C2518 and it seems that --disable-prf has cut the >>> performance >>> in half. We should receive a 8920 soon. >>> >>>>> Stopping the injection, the haproxy process continue to steal cpu doing >>>>> nothing (top shows ~50% of one core, mainly in user): >>>> Hmm, an idle haproxy process with qat enabled consumes about 5% of a core >>>> in >>>> my test. 50% is too much:-(. >>> In theory it should not consume anything anymore if it has nothing to do, >>> so maybe the 5% you observed will help understand what is happening. >> I've just noticed 50% cpu usage directly at start-up if we enable the engine >> (w or wout ssl-async): >> global >> tune.ssl.default-dh-param 2048 >> ssl-engine qat >> # ssl-async >> >> listen gg >> mode http >> bind 0.0.0.0:9443 ssl crt /root/2048.pem ciphers AES >> redirect location > Somehow I cannot reproduce the cpu usage issue using the above config. In my > test with the above config, when haproxy is idle, pidstat shows 4% cpu usage > > 11:49:14 PM 359247 3.33 1.33 0.00 4.67 1 haproxy_nodebug > 11:49:17 PM 359247 3.33 1.33 0.00 4.67 1 haproxy_nodebug > 11:49:20 PM 359247 2.67 1.33 0.00 4.00 1 haproxy_nodebug > > When it is under load test the cpu usage jumps to 100%(single process mode): > 11:51:26 PM 359247 85.67 21.67 0.00 107.33 8 haproxy_nodebug > > I am not sure whether it is the different hardware(c2000 vs. 895X), or some > difference in software. Just something to check: We've juste reveive dh8920 but the qat config dh89xx fails to load with.
> * your kernel version (I tested with 4.4/4.7/4.9 without problem though), and > qat driver version? I'm using centos as described in intel's doc: [root@centos QAT_Engine]# uname -a Linux centos 3.10.0-514.10.2.el7.x86_64 #1 SMP Fri Mar 3 00:04:05 UTC 2017 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux and for qat qatmux.l.2.6.0-60 (QAT1.5) > * openssl version (1.1.0b-e?) compiled 1.1.0e > * are you using the latest QAT_ENGINE https://github.com/01org/QAT_Engine Yes, i am > * I assume you use qat_contig_mem kernel module? Yes, i am > * are you using the following config file for your c2000 card? > https://github.com/01org/QAT_Engine/blob/master/qat/config/c2xxx/multi_process_optimized/c2xxx_qa_dev0.conf I'm using the one provided with the driver, reviewed and patched by intel guys because not compliant with my ship because provided one is for 2 engines and mine have only one. > Thanks, > > Grant > Could you provide patches rebased on current dev master branch? R, Emeric
