Re: High Network Perfomance
Hi Slawa! Thanks for the links! That's great links! about russian, there is no problem... google translate :) thanks, Victor On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Slawa Olhovchenkov s...@zxy.spb.ru wrote: On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 08:39:17PM -0300, Victor Detoni wrote: Hi Guys, I'm trying tunning a FreeBSD 8.2 to high perfomance network with pf. My server configuration is: Dell 1950 CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU5130 @ 2.00GHz (1995.03-MHz K8-class CPU) 4 x CPU 2 NIC (Broadcom NetXtreme II BCM5708 1000Base-T) 1 NIC (em0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection 7.1.9) I want to reach the high processing of packets per second and use pf as synproxy and we still processor to handle others packets or flows. I know that em drivers has MULTI_QUEUE implementation that helps high performance for Intel drivers, but I couldn't see more information about. We can reached 500k pps, but no more traffic was processed by this interface. I've already enabled net.isr.direct but with Intel Drivers does not work and the most processors are in System instead of Interrupts, why? When I enable net.isr.direct the processing is balanced for on CPU in system and another in interrupt and I reached 1M pps, but the total perfomance is down, the load grow up too fast. I've changed some parameter in sysctl for intel drivers, but it doesn't have effect. Someone know what I can do to reach more packets performance? I want to use this FreeBSD as a router/firewall only. FreeBSD (and em) need some tuning for high perfomance. Next links in russian, sorry. http://dadv.livejournal.com/138951.html http://dadv.livejournal.com/139170.html http://dadv.livejournal.com/139366.html -- Slawa Olhovchenkov ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High Network Perfomance
On 8/8/2011 12:21 PM, Victor Detoni wrote: Hi Slawa! Thanks for the links! That's great links! about russian, there is no problem... google translate :) Yes, excellent links indeed and google translate is awesome! One further question. Do you usually set net.isr.bindthreads=1 ---Mike thanks, Victor On Sun, Aug 7, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Slawa Olhovchenkov s...@zxy.spb.ru wrote: On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 08:39:17PM -0300, Victor Detoni wrote: Hi Guys, I'm trying tunning a FreeBSD 8.2 to high perfomance network with pf. My server configuration is: Dell 1950 CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU5130 @ 2.00GHz (1995.03-MHz K8-class CPU) 4 x CPU 2 NIC (Broadcom NetXtreme II BCM5708 1000Base-T) 1 NIC (em0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection 7.1.9) I want to reach the high processing of packets per second and use pf as synproxy and we still processor to handle others packets or flows. I know that em drivers has MULTI_QUEUE implementation that helps high performance for Intel drivers, but I couldn't see more information about. We can reached 500k pps, but no more traffic was processed by this interface. I've already enabled net.isr.direct but with Intel Drivers does not work and the most processors are in System instead of Interrupts, why? When I enable net.isr.direct the processing is balanced for on CPU in system and another in interrupt and I reached 1M pps, but the total perfomance is down, the load grow up too fast. I've changed some parameter in sysctl for intel drivers, but it doesn't have effect. Someone know what I can do to reach more packets performance? I want to use this FreeBSD as a router/firewall only. FreeBSD (and em) need some tuning for high perfomance. Next links in russian, sorry. http://dadv.livejournal.com/138951.html http://dadv.livejournal.com/139170.html http://dadv.livejournal.com/139366.html -- Slawa Olhovchenkov ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- --- Mike Tancsa, tel +1 519 651 3400 Sentex Communications, m...@sentex.net Providing Internet services since 1994 www.sentex.net Cambridge, Ontario Canada http://www.tancsa.com/ ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High Network Perfomance
On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 08:39:17PM -0300, Victor Detoni wrote: Hi Guys, I'm trying tunning a FreeBSD 8.2 to high perfomance network with pf. My server configuration is: Dell 1950 CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU5130 @ 2.00GHz (1995.03-MHz K8-class CPU) 4 x CPU 2 NIC (Broadcom NetXtreme II BCM5708 1000Base-T) 1 NIC (em0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection 7.1.9) I want to reach the high processing of packets per second and use pf as synproxy and we still processor to handle others packets or flows. I know that em drivers has MULTI_QUEUE implementation that helps high performance for Intel drivers, but I couldn't see more information about. We can reached 500k pps, but no more traffic was processed by this interface. I've already enabled net.isr.direct but with Intel Drivers does not work and the most processors are in System instead of Interrupts, why? When I enable net.isr.direct the processing is balanced for on CPU in system and another in interrupt and I reached 1M pps, but the total perfomance is down, the load grow up too fast. I've changed some parameter in sysctl for intel drivers, but it doesn't have effect. Someone know what I can do to reach more packets performance? I want to use this FreeBSD as a router/firewall only. FreeBSD (and em) need some tuning for high perfomance. Next links in russian, sorry. http://dadv.livejournal.com/138951.html http://dadv.livejournal.com/139170.html http://dadv.livejournal.com/139366.html -- Slawa Olhovchenkov ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High Network Perfomance
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 08:34:19PM -0400, Outback Dingo wrote: On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 7:31 PM, Luigi Rizzo ri...@iet.unipi.it wrote: On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 04:07:22PM -0300, Victor Detoni wrote: Hi Luigi, Thanks for reply. That's great solution :) Will be integrated with pf or is it? unfortunately i don't have the time to do it, but as said in the thread it should not be terribly difficult. The demo image has a modified click is there a diff for click itself. if i am not wrong the modifications have been imported (in an improved form) in the source tree for Click 2.0 cheers luigi ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High Network Perfomance
Victor Detoni wrote: Hi Guys, I'm trying tunning a FreeBSD 8.2 to high perfomance network with pf. My server configuration is: Dell 1950 CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU5130 @ 2.00GHz (1995.03-MHz K8-class CPU) 4 x CPU 2 NIC (Broadcom NetXtreme II BCM5708 1000Base-T) 1 NIC (em0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection 7.1.9) I want to reach the high processing of packets per second and use pf as synproxy and we still processor to handle others packets or flows. Benchmarking I did a few years ago showed a strong correlation between forwarding rate and CPU L1 cache size. As well as an inverse relationship to the number of CPUs in the system. At the time, some architectures were worse than others. Intel Pentium4/Xeons had a halving and AMD Opteron/Athlon had about a 7% reduction in forwarding rate with SMP compared to UP. I haven't had the chance to re-run these tests recently. Set net.inet.ip.fastforwarding=1 and run benchmarks to test your forwarding rates with different configurations. See for some results: http://docs.freebsd.org/cgi/getmsg.cgi?fetch=77846+0+archive/2008/freebsd-net/20080120.freebsd-net Ian -- Ian Freislich ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High Network Perfomance
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 04:28:19PM +0200, Pieter de Goeje wrote: On Friday, August 05, 2011 02:27:33 AM Luigi Rizzo wrote: if you feel like doing a bit of coding yourself, you could try netmap http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/netmap/ Out of curiosity, will this code be integrated in FreeBSD? Because it seems really useful and a lot of programs might benefit from this. i asked permission to re@ to integrate it in 9.0 but it was considered a bit premature. However i am not too worried because the system dependencies are minimal and it changes no API/ABI or internal data structure so it is easy to add it at a later time. cheers luigi ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High Network Perfomance
on 05/08/2011 17:56 Luigi Rizzo said the following: i asked permission to re@ to integrate it in 9.0 but it was considered a bit premature. However i am not too worried because the system dependencies are minimal and it changes no API/ABI or internal data structure so it is easy to add it at a later time. /rant I think that having real, useful in practice applications that make use of the netmap would definitely speed up its adoption. Maybe I am too pessimistic here, but I don't foresee too many users of netmap as long as it remains just a mechanism that potentially can greatly speed up things if you manage to write your own applications that do those things via netmap. Full TCP/IP stack with sockets API on top of it and lots of available applications on top of that is one thing, an interface to a network card is a totally different thing on a scale of usability (especially the by the end-users). -- Andriy Gapon ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High Network Perfomance
On Friday, August 05, 2011 02:27:33 AM Luigi Rizzo wrote: if you feel like doing a bit of coding yourself, you could try netmap http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/netmap/ Out of curiosity, will this code be integrated in FreeBSD? Because it seems really useful and a lot of programs might benefit from this. Regards, Pieter ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High Network Perfomance
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 5:03 PM, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote: on 05/08/2011 17:56 Luigi Rizzo said the following: i asked permission to re@ to integrate it in 9.0 but it was considered a bit premature. However i am not too worried because the system dependencies are minimal and it changes no API/ABI or internal data structure so it is easy to add it at a later time. /rant I think that having real, useful in practice applications that make use of the netmap would definitely speed up its adoption. Maybe I am too pessimistic here, but I don't foresee too many users of netmap as long as it remains just a mechanism that potentially can greatly speed up things if you manage to write your own applications that do those things via netmap. Full TCP/IP stack with sockets API on top of it and lots of available applications on top of that is one thing, an interface to a network card is a totally different thing on a scale of usability (especially the by the end-users). Netmap's scope may be narrow, but it's a great alternative to proprietary implementations that are provided by only a handful of vendors and tied to their hardware. I don't think Luigi foresees lots of users either, but having it in the base system is a lot better than not having it at all, IMHO. -- Andriy Gapon ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org -- Good, fast cheap. Pick any two. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High Network Perfomance
on 05/08/2011 18:23 Vlad Galu said the following: Netmap's scope may be narrow, but it's a great alternative to proprietary implementations that are provided by only a handful of vendors and tied to their hardware. I don't think Luigi foresees lots of users either, but having it in the base system is a lot better than not having it at all, IMHO. No doubt. On the other hand, it was a little bit misleading of Luigi to suggest netmap to a user who merely asked about tuning FreeBSD network (routing/firewall) performance :-) netmap can no doubt be useful, but perhaps let's not overhype it before it actually proves itself on practical tasks. Or has it already? I might have missed that. -- Andriy Gapon ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High Network Perfomance
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote: on 05/08/2011 18:23 Vlad Galu said the following: Netmap's scope may be narrow, but it's a great alternative to proprietary implementations that are provided by only a handful of vendors and tied to their hardware. I don't think Luigi foresees lots of users either, but having it in the base system is a lot better than not having it at all, IMHO. No doubt. On the other hand, it was a little bit misleading of Luigi to suggest netmap to a user who merely asked about tuning FreeBSD network (routing/firewall) performance :-) netmap can no doubt be useful, but perhaps let's not overhype it before it actually proves itself on practical tasks. Or has it already? I might have missed that. It's great for IDS/IPS, which is exactly what I'm using it for :) -- Andriy Gapon -- Good, fast cheap. Pick any two. ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High Network Perfomance
on 05/08/2011 18:40 Vlad Galu said the following: On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 5:34 PM, Andriy Gapon a...@freebsd.org wrote: on 05/08/2011 18:23 Vlad Galu said the following: Netmap's scope may be narrow, but it's a great alternative to proprietary implementations that are provided by only a handful of vendors and tied to their hardware. I don't think Luigi foresees lots of users either, but having it in the base system is a lot better than not having it at all, IMHO. No doubt. On the other hand, it was a little bit misleading of Luigi to suggest netmap to a user who merely asked about tuning FreeBSD network (routing/firewall) performance :-) netmap can no doubt be useful, but perhaps let's not overhype it before it actually proves itself on practical tasks. Or has it already? I might have missed that. It's great for IDS/IPS, which is exactly what I'm using it for :) Oh, yes, haven't thought about this. -- Andriy Gapon ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High Network Perfomance
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 06:34:54PM +0300, Andriy Gapon wrote: on 05/08/2011 18:23 Vlad Galu said the following: Netmap's scope may be narrow, but it's a great alternative to proprietary implementations that are provided by only a handful of vendors and tied to their hardware. I don't think Luigi foresees lots of users either, but having it in the base system is a lot better than not having it at all, IMHO. No doubt. On the other hand, it was a little bit misleading of Luigi to suggest netmap to a user who merely asked about tuning FreeBSD network (routing/firewall) performance :-) Sure, i took the chance to advertise the product a bit :) But the original poster essentially wanted to go as fast as i can and any tweaks that one can do on the system won't bring him much further than the 500Kpps he is seeing. Perhaps 1Mpps. Not too exciting. netmap can no doubt be useful, but perhaps let's not overhype it before it actually proves itself on practical tasks. Or has it already? I might have missed that. Its the latter. The libpcap-over-netmap code has been there for a while, but documentation was not completely up to date so we are both at fault. I just updated the webpage with links to another paper reporting performance of the libpcap emulation library, Click and OpenvSwitch. There is also a new set of slides for a talk i am going to give at various locations in the Bay Area next week (if you are around, email me privately for details) Our libpcap makes netmap immediately available for basically all pcap clients (sure, you might need a bit of tinkering, and some apps could have their own speed issues -- see our study on Click and OpenvSwitch). Click userspace now runs (on FreeBSD+netmap) as fast or better than the in-kernel linux version. Which means that all research and prototypes that were bound to Linux because of this reason, now could consider switching platform. Note that having netmap does not prevent the existing stack from working. I have designed the system in a way that allows incremental improvement/replacement of the components. I am working on bringing outside the kernel ipfw+dummynet (relatively straightforward, i did it already once a couple of years ago), and then the routing tables. netgraph could be another candidate (though i dont know how much work it involves; netgraph is very similar to Click, and the latter might have a richer set of elements). For TCP (and high speed TCP) i don't have a clear view on what are the bottlenecks, but with 1500-byte MTU your pps rates are 20 times lower, so the problem is entirely different and saving 400ns per packet does help, but not as much as when packets arrive every 70ns. cheers luigi -+--- Prof. Luigi RIZZO, ri...@iet.unipi.it . Dip. di Ing. dell'Informazione http://www.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/. Universita` di Pisa TEL +39-050-2211611 . via Diotisalvi 2 Mobile +39-338-6809875 . 56122 PISA (Italy) -+--- ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High Network Perfomance
Oh, wow! Great news! It's much more than I expected. Unfortunately I am too far from the Bay Area. on 05/08/2011 19:12 Luigi Rizzo said the following: Its the latter. The libpcap-over-netmap code has been there for a while, but documentation was not completely up to date so we are both at fault. I just updated the webpage with links to another paper reporting performance of the libpcap emulation library, Click and OpenvSwitch. There is also a new set of slides for a talk i am going to give at various locations in the Bay Area next week (if you are around, email me privately for details) Our libpcap makes netmap immediately available for basically all pcap clients (sure, you might need a bit of tinkering, and some apps could have their own speed issues -- see our study on Click and OpenvSwitch). Click userspace now runs (on FreeBSD+netmap) as fast or better than the in-kernel linux version. Which means that all research and prototypes that were bound to Linux because of this reason, now could consider switching platform. Note that having netmap does not prevent the existing stack from working. I have designed the system in a way that allows incremental improvement/replacement of the components. I am working on bringing outside the kernel ipfw+dummynet (relatively straightforward, i did it already once a couple of years ago), and then the routing tables. netgraph could be another candidate (though i dont know how much work it involves; netgraph is very similar to Click, and the latter might have a richer set of elements). For TCP (and high speed TCP) i don't have a clear view on what are the bottlenecks, but with 1500-byte MTU your pps rates are 20 times lower, so the problem is entirely different and saving 400ns per packet does help, but not as much as when packets arrive every 70ns. cheers luigi -+--- Prof. Luigi RIZZO, ri...@iet.unipi.it . Dip. di Ing. dell'Informazione http://www.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/. Universita` di Pisa TEL +39-050-2211611 . via Diotisalvi 2 Mobile +39-338-6809875 . 56122 PISA (Italy) -+--- -- Andriy Gapon ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High Network Perfomance
Hi Luigi, Thanks for reply. That's great solution :) Will be integrated with pf or is it? Thanks, Victor On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Luigi Rizzo ri...@iet.unipi.it wrote: On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 08:39:17PM -0300, Victor Detoni wrote: Hi Guys, I'm trying tunning a FreeBSD 8.2 to high perfomance network with pf. My server configuration is: Dell 1950 CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU5130 @ 2.00GHz (1995.03-MHz K8-class CPU) 4 x CPU 2 NIC (Broadcom NetXtreme II BCM5708 1000Base-T) 1 NIC (em0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection 7.1.9) I want to reach the high processing of packets per second and use pf as synproxy and we still processor to handle others packets or flows. I know that em drivers has MULTI_QUEUE implementation that helps high performance for Intel drivers, but I couldn't see more information about. We can reached 500k pps, but no more traffic was processed by this interface. I've already enabled net.isr.direct but with Intel Drivers does not work and the most processors are in System instead of Interrupts, why? When I enable net.isr.direct the processing is balanced for on CPU in system and another in interrupt and I reached 1M pps, but the total perfomance is down, the load grow up too fast. I've changed some parameter in sysctl for intel drivers, but it doesn't have effect. Someone know what I can do to reach more packets performance? I want to use this FreeBSD as a router/firewall only. if you feel like doing a bit of coding yourself, you could try netmap http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/netmap/ cheers luigi Thanks, Victor ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High Network Perfomance
On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 04:07:22PM -0300, Victor Detoni wrote: Hi Luigi, Thanks for reply. That's great solution :) Will be integrated with pf or is it? unfortunately i don't have the time to do it, but as said in the thread it should not be terribly difficult. cheers luigi Thanks, Victor On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Luigi Rizzo ri...@iet.unipi.it wrote: On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 08:39:17PM -0300, Victor Detoni wrote: Hi Guys, I'm trying tunning a FreeBSD 8.2 to high perfomance network with pf. My server configuration is: Dell 1950 CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU5130 @ 2.00GHz (1995.03-MHz K8-class CPU) 4 x CPU 2 NIC (Broadcom NetXtreme II BCM5708 1000Base-T) 1 NIC (em0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection 7.1.9) I want to reach the high processing of packets per second and use pf as synproxy and we still processor to handle others packets or flows. I know that em drivers has MULTI_QUEUE implementation that helps high performance for Intel drivers, but I couldn't see more information about. We can reached 500k pps, but no more traffic was processed by this interface. I've already enabled net.isr.direct but with Intel Drivers does not work and the most processors are in System instead of Interrupts, why? When I enable net.isr.direct the processing is balanced for on CPU in system and another in interrupt and I reached 1M pps, but the total perfomance is down, the load grow up too fast. I've changed some parameter in sysctl for intel drivers, but it doesn't have effect. Someone know what I can do to reach more packets performance? I want to use this FreeBSD as a router/firewall only. if you feel like doing a bit of coding yourself, you could try netmap http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/netmap/ cheers luigi Thanks, Victor ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High Network Perfomance
On Fri, Aug 5, 2011 at 7:31 PM, Luigi Rizzo ri...@iet.unipi.it wrote: On Fri, Aug 05, 2011 at 04:07:22PM -0300, Victor Detoni wrote: Hi Luigi, Thanks for reply. That's great solution :) Will be integrated with pf or is it? unfortunately i don't have the time to do it, but as said in the thread it should not be terribly difficult. The demo image has a modified click is there a diff for click itself. cheers luigi Thanks, Victor On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 9:27 PM, Luigi Rizzo ri...@iet.unipi.it wrote: On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 08:39:17PM -0300, Victor Detoni wrote: Hi Guys, I'm trying tunning a FreeBSD 8.2 to high perfomance network with pf. My server configuration is: Dell 1950 CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU5130 @ 2.00GHz (1995.03-MHz K8-class CPU) 4 x CPU 2 NIC (Broadcom NetXtreme II BCM5708 1000Base-T) 1 NIC (em0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection 7.1.9) I want to reach the high processing of packets per second and use pf as synproxy and we still processor to handle others packets or flows. I know that em drivers has MULTI_QUEUE implementation that helps high performance for Intel drivers, but I couldn't see more information about. We can reached 500k pps, but no more traffic was processed by this interface. I've already enabled net.isr.direct but with Intel Drivers does not work and the most processors are in System instead of Interrupts, why? When I enable net.isr.direct the processing is balanced for on CPU in system and another in interrupt and I reached 1M pps, but the total perfomance is down, the load grow up too fast. I've changed some parameter in sysctl for intel drivers, but it doesn't have effect. Someone know what I can do to reach more packets performance? I want to use this FreeBSD as a router/firewall only. if you feel like doing a bit of coding yourself, you could try netmap http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/netmap/ cheers luigi Thanks, Victor ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: High Network Perfomance
On Thu, Aug 04, 2011 at 08:39:17PM -0300, Victor Detoni wrote: Hi Guys, I'm trying tunning a FreeBSD 8.2 to high perfomance network with pf. My server configuration is: Dell 1950 CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU5130 @ 2.00GHz (1995.03-MHz K8-class CPU) 4 x CPU 2 NIC (Broadcom NetXtreme II BCM5708 1000Base-T) 1 NIC (em0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 Network Connection 7.1.9) I want to reach the high processing of packets per second and use pf as synproxy and we still processor to handle others packets or flows. I know that em drivers has MULTI_QUEUE implementation that helps high performance for Intel drivers, but I couldn't see more information about. We can reached 500k pps, but no more traffic was processed by this interface. I've already enabled net.isr.direct but with Intel Drivers does not work and the most processors are in System instead of Interrupts, why? When I enable net.isr.direct the processing is balanced for on CPU in system and another in interrupt and I reached 1M pps, but the total perfomance is down, the load grow up too fast. I've changed some parameter in sysctl for intel drivers, but it doesn't have effect. Someone know what I can do to reach more packets performance? I want to use this FreeBSD as a router/firewall only. if you feel like doing a bit of coding yourself, you could try netmap http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/netmap/ cheers luigi Thanks, Victor ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org ___ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
