RE: linux-next network throughput performance regression

e...@linuxdriverproject.org; > netdev@vger.kernel.org; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; David Miller > <da...@davemloft.net>; KY Srinivasan <k...@microsoft.com>; Haiyang > Zhang <haiya...@microsoft.com> > Subject: Re: linux-next network throughput performance regression &

Re: linux-next network throughput performance regression

On Mon, 2015-11-09 at 20:23 +, Simon Xiao wrote: > Thanks Eric to provide the data. I am looping Tom (as I am looking into his > recent patches) and Olaf (from Suse). > > So, if I understand it correctly, you are running netperf with single > TCP connection, and you got ~26Gbps initially and

RE: linux-next network throughput performance regression

gt; ker...@vger.kernel.org; de...@linuxdriverproject.org; David Miller > <da...@davemloft.net> > Subject: Re: linux-next network throughput performance regression > > On Fri, 2015-11-06 at 14:30 -0700, David Ahern wrote: > > On 11/6/15 2:18 PM, Simon Xiao wrote: > > &g

Re: linux-next network throughput performance regression

onday, November 9, 2015 10:53 >>> To: Dexuan Cui <de...@microsoft.com> >>> Cc: eric.duma...@gmail.com; d...@cumulusnetworks.com; Simon Xiao >>> <six...@microsoft.com>; netdev@vger.kernel.org; Haiyang Zhang >>> <haiya...@microsoft.com>; linux-k

Re: linux-next network throughput performance regression

From: Dexuan Cui Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 02:39:24 + >> Throughput on a single TCP flow for a 40G NIC can be tricky to tune. > Why is a single TCP flow trickier than multiple TCP flows? > IMO it should be easier to analyze the issue of a single TCP flow? Because a single

RE: linux-next network throughput performance regression

el.org; Haiyang Zhang > <haiya...@microsoft.com>; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; > de...@linuxdriverproject.org > Subject: Re: linux-next network throughput performance regression > > From: Dexuan Cui <de...@microsoft.com> > Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2015 02:39:24 + > &

RE: linux-next network throughput performance regression

> From: David Miller [mailto:da...@davemloft.net] > Sent: Monday, November 9, 2015 11:24 > ... > > Thanks, David! > > I understand 1 TX queue is the bottleneck (however in Simon's > > test, TX=1 => 36.7Gb/s, TX=8 => 37.7 Gb/s, so it looks the TX=1 bottleneck > > is not so obvious). > > I'm just

Re: linux-next network throughput performance regression

uma...@gmail.com; d...@cumulusnetworks.com; Simon Xiao >> <six...@microsoft.com>; netdev@vger.kernel.org; Haiyang Zhang >> <haiya...@microsoft.com>; linux-ker...@vger.kernel.org; >> de...@linuxdriverproject.org >> Subject: Re: linux-next network throughput performanc

Re: linux-next network throughput performance regression

On Sun, Nov 8, 2015 at 7:31 PM, Dexuan Cui wrote: >> From: David Miller [mailto:da...@davemloft.net] >> Sent: Monday, November 9, 2015 11:24 >> ... >> > Thanks, David! >> > I understand 1 TX queue is the bottleneck (however in Simon's >> > test, TX=1 => 36.7Gb/s, TX=8 => 37.7

Re: linux-next network throughput performance regression

On Fri, 2015-11-06 at 14:30 -0700, David Ahern wrote: > On 11/6/15 2:18 PM, Simon Xiao wrote: > > The .config file used to build linux-next kernel is attached to this mail. > > Thanks. > > Failed to notice this on the first response; my brain filled in. Why > linux-next tree? Can you try

Re: linux-next network throughput performance regression

On Sat, 2015-11-07 at 11:35 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Fri, 2015-11-06 at 14:30 -0700, David Ahern wrote: > > On 11/6/15 2:18 PM, Simon Xiao wrote: > > > The .config file used to build linux-next kernel is attached to this mail. > > > > Thanks. > > > > Failed to notice this on the first

linux-next network throughput performance regression

I compared the network throughput performance on SLES12 bare metal servers, between SLES12 default kernel and latest linux-next (2015-11-05) kernel, based on the test results, I suspect there is a network regression exists on Linux-Next over the 40G Ethernet network: a) iperf3 reports 50%

Re: linux-next network throughput performance regression

On 11/6/15 1:31 PM, Simon Xiao wrote: I compared the network throughput performance on SLES12 bare metal servers, between SLES12 default kernel and latest linux-next (2015-11-05) kernel, based on the test results, I suspect there is a network regression exists on Linux-Next over the 40G

Re: linux-next network throughput performance regression

On 11/6/15 2:18 PM, Simon Xiao wrote: The .config file used to build linux-next kernel is attached to this mail. Thanks. Failed to notice this on the first response; my brain filled in. Why linux-next tree? Can you try net-next which is more relevant for this mailing list, post the top