On 25.10.2016. 0:22, Hrvoje Popovski wrote:
> On 24.10.2016. 23:36, Mike Belopuhov wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 19:04 +0200, Hrvoje Popovski wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> OpenBSD box acts as transit router for /8 networks without pf and with
>>> this sysctls
>>>
>>> ddb.console=1
>>> kern.pool_debug=0
>>> net.inet.ip.forwarding=1
>>> net.inet.ip.ifq.maxlen=8192
>>>
>>> netstat
>>> 11/8               192.168.11.2       UGS        0 114466419     -     8 ix0
>>> 12/8               192.168.12.2       UGS        0        0     -     8 ix1
>>> 13/8               192.168.13.2       UGS        0        0     -     8 myx0
>>> 14/8               192.168.14.2       UGS        0        0     -     8 myx1
>>> 15/8               192.168.15.2       UGS        0        0     -     8 em3
>>> 16/8               192.168.16.2       UGS        0 89907239     -     8 em2
>>> 17/8               192.168.17.2       UGS        0 65791508     -     8 bge0
>>> 18/8               192.168.18.2       UGS        0        0     -     8 bge1
>>>
>>> while testing dlg@ "mcl2k2 mbuf clusters" patch with todays -current i
>>> saw that performance with plain -current drops for about 300Kpps vs
>>> -current from 06.10.2016. by bisecting cvs tree it seems that this
>>> commit is guilty for this
>>>
>>> http://cvsweb.openbsd.org/cgi-bin/cvsweb/src/sys/net/if_ethersubr.c?rev=1.240&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup
>>>
>>
>> I don't see how this change can affect performance in such a way
>> unless you're sending jumbo packets, but then the packet rates
>> are too high.  Are you 100% sure it's this particular change?
>>
> 
> No, no, i'm not 100% sure. I was doing this to try to find bottleneck:
> 
> cvs -q checkout -D "2016-10-XX" -P src
> 
> 2016-10-06 - 900kpps
> 2016-10-07 - 900kpps
> 2016-10-10 - 900kpps
> 2016-10-11 - 650kpps
> 2016-10-11 with if_ethersubr.c 1.239 - 900kpps
> ...
> 2016-10-14 - 650kpps
> 2016-10-14 with dlg@ patch - 900kpps
> 2016-10-14 with dlg@ patch and with if_ethersubr.c 1.239 - 880kpps
> ....
> 2016-10-24 - results are in mail ...
> 
> and then i looked at networking diffs from 2016-10-10 and 2016-10-11 and
> it seems that if_ethersubr.c is guilty
> 
> tests was done over ix only ...
> 
> although as you can see with today's plain -current i'm getting 690kpps
> and with today's -current with if_ethersubr.c 1.239 i'm getting 910kpps
> 

just please see that bge performance are the same with if_ethersubr.c
1.239 or 1.241. i haven't test myx, will do that ...

Reply via email to