skip this message. I will recheck. Pushed to lava wrong branch. On 6 December 2017 at 10:42, Maxim Uvarov <maxim.uva...@linaro.org> wrote:
> Ilias was right yesterday. If number of descriptors increased to 1024 then > TX became again 10M. > > + ret = rte_eth_tx_queue_setup(port_id, i, > + dev_info.tx_desc_lim.nb_max > > 1024 ? 1024 : dev_info.tx_desc_lim.nb_max, > > rte_eth_dev_socket_id(port_id), > txconf); > > + ret = rte_eth_rx_queue_setup(port_id, i, > + dev_info.rx_desc_lim.nb_max > > 1024 ? 1024 : dev_info.rx_desc_lim.nb_max, > > rte_eth_dev_socket_id(port_id), > NULL, pkt_dpdk->pkt_pool); > > > > > Maxim. > > On 5 December 2017 at 11:20, Elo, Matias (Nokia - FI/Espoo) < > matias....@nokia.com> wrote: > >> When I tested enabling HW checksum with Fortville NICs (i40e) the slower >> driver path alone caused ~20% throughput drop on l2fwd test. This was >> without actually calculating the checksums, I simply forced the slower >> driver path (no vectorization). >> >> -Matias >> >> >> > On 5 Dec 2017, at 8:59, Bogdan Pricope <bogdan.pric...@linaro.org> >> wrote: >> > >> > On RX side is kind-of expected result since it uses scheduler mode. >> > >> > On TX side there is this drop from 10 mpps to 7.69 mpps that is >> unexpected. >> > >> > So Petri, when you said: >> > "DPDK uses less optimized driver code (on Intel NICs at least) when >> > any of the L4 checksum offloads is enabled." >> > >> > you were referring to this kind of drop in performance? >> > >> > There is that 'folklore' that SW csum is faster on small packets while >> > HW csum is faster on bigger packets. Do you have this kind of data? >> > >> > Anyway, for this particular case (odp_generator), since UDP >> > header/payload is not changing during the test (for now), csum is >> > calculated only once at the beginning of the test: so we are comparing >> > HW IPv4 + HW UDP csum vs. SW IPv4 csum.... yet, the differences in >> > performance is huge... >> > >> > >> > On 4 December 2017 at 20:37, Maxim Uvarov <maxim.uva...@linaro.org> >> wrote: >> >> I added isocpus and mounted huge page TX became more stable at 7.6M. >> But >> >> anyway it's better to test performance for this PR because previous >> >> speed was 10M. >> >> >> >> Maxim. >> >> >> >> On 12/04/17 19:42, Honnappa Nagarahalli wrote: >> >>> Can you run with Linux-DPDK in ODP 2.0? >> >>> >> >>> On 4 December 2017 at 09:54, Maxim Uvarov <maxim.uva...@linaro.org> >> wrote: >> >>>> after clean patches apply and fix in run scripts I made it run. >> >>>> >> >>>> But results is really bad. --enable-dpdk-zero-copy >> >>>> >> >>>> TX rate is: >> >>>> 7673155 pps >> >>>> >> >>>> RX rate is: >> >>>> 5989846 pps >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> Before patch PR 313 TX was 10M pps. >> >>>> >> >>>> I re run task and TX is 3.3M pps. All tests are single core. So >> >>>> something strange happens in lava or this PR. >> >>>> >> >>>> Maxim. >> >>>> >> >>>> >> >>>> On 12/04/17 17:03, Bogdan Pricope wrote: >> >>>>> On TX (https://lng.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/23252.0) I >> see: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> ODP_REPO='https://github.com/muvarov/odp' >> >>>>> ODP_BRANCH='api-next' >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On RX (https://lng.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/23252.1) I >> see: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> ODP_REPO='https://github.com/muvarov/odp' >> >>>>> ODP_BRANCH='devel/api-next_shsum' >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> or are you referring to other test? >> >>>>> >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On 4 December 2017 at 15:53, Maxim Uvarov <maxim.uva...@linaro.org> >> wrote: >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> On 4 December 2017 at 15:11, Bogdan Pricope < >> bogdan.pric...@linaro.org> >> >>>>>> wrote: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> You need to put 313 on TX side (not RX). >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> both rx and tx have patches from 313. l2fwd works on recv side. >> Generator >> >>>>>> does not work. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> Maxim. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> On 4 December 2017 at 13:19, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) >> >>>>>>> <petri.savolai...@nokia.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>> Is the DPDK version 17.08 ? Other versions might not work >> properly. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> -Petri >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> From: Maxim Uvarov [mailto:maxim.uva...@linaro.org] >> >>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, December 04, 2017 1:10 PM >> >>>>>>>> To: Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) < >> petri.savolai...@nokia.com> >> >>>>>>>> Cc: Bogdan Pricope <bogdan.pric...@linaro.org>; lng-odp-forward >> >>>>>>>> <lng-odp@lists.linaro.org> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [lng-odp] odp dpdk >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> 313 does not work also: >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> https://lng.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/23242.1 >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> I will replace RX side to l2fwd and see that will be there. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> Maxim. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> On 4 December 2017 at 13:46, Savolainen, Petri (Nokia - FI/Espoo) >> >>>>>>>> <petri.savolai...@nokia.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> Maxim, try https://github.com/Linaro/odp/pull/313 It has been >> tested to >> >>>>>>>> fix >> >>>>>>>> checksum insert for 10/40GE Intel NICs. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> -Petri >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> -----Original Message----- >> >>>>>>>>> From: lng-odp [mailto:lng-odp-boun...@lists.linaro.org] On >> Behalf Of >> >>>>>>>>> Bogdan Pricope >> >>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, December 04, 2017 12:21 PM >> >>>>>>>>> To: Maxim Uvarov <maxim.uva...@linaro.org> >> >>>>>>>>> Cc: lng-odp-forward <lng-odp@lists.linaro.org> >> >>>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [lng-odp] odp dpdk >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> I suspect this is actually caused by csum issue in TX side: on >> RX, >> >>>>>>>>> socket pktio does not validate csum (and accept the packets) >> but on >> >>>>>>>>> dpdk pktio the csum is validated and packets are dropped. >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> I am not seeing this in my setup because default txq_flags for >> igb >> >>>>>>>>> driver (1G interface) is >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> .txq_flags = 0 >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> while for ixgbe (10G interface) is: >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> .txq_flags = ETH_TXQ_FLAGS_NOMULTSEGS | >> >>>>>>>>> ETH_TXQ_FLAGS_NOOFFLOADS, >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> /B >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> On 1 December 2017 at 23:47, Maxim Uvarov < >> maxim.uva...@linaro.org> >> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Looking to dpdk pktio support and generator. It looks like >> receive >> >>>>>>>>>> part >> >>>>>>>>>> is broken. If for receive I use sockets it works well but >> receive >> >>>>>>>>>> with >> >>>>>>>>>> dpdk does not get any packets. For both master and api-next. >> Can >> >>>>>>>>>> somebody confirm please that it's so. Lava is not supper >> friendly to >> >>>>>>>>>> debug issue. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> 1. Recv >> >>>>>>>>>> odp_generator -I 0 -m r -c 0x4 >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> https://lng.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/23206.1 >> >>>>>>>>>> Network devices using DPDK-compatible driver >> >>>>>>>>>> ============================================ >> >>>>>>>>>> 0000:07:00.1 '82599ES 10-Gigabit SFI/SFP+ Network Connection >> 10fb' >> >>>>>>>>>> drv=igb_uio unused= >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> 2. Send >> >>>>>>>>>> odp_generator -I 0 --srcmac 38:ea:a7:93:98:94 --dstmac >> >>>>>>>>>> 38:ea:a7:93:83:a0 >> >>>>>>>>>> --srcip 192.168.100.2 --dstip 192.168.100.1 -m u -i 0 -c 0x8 >> -p 18 -e >> >>>>>>>>>> 5000 -f 5001 -n 800000000 >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> https://lng.validation.linaro.org/scheduler/job/23206.0 >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> Thank you, >> >>>>>>>>>> Maxim. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> >> >>>> >> >> >> >> >
