From:  Royce Niu <[email protected]>
Date:  Monday, March 7, 2016 at 10:01 AM
To:  Keith Wiles <keith.wiles at intel.com>
Cc:  Royce Niu <royceniu at gmail.com>, "users at dpdk.org" <users at dpdk.org>
Subject:  Re: [dpdk-users] Performance Problem of DPDK pkt-gen


>Dear Keith,
>
>I am doing the measurement works. The two PCs are same in software/physical 
>configuration with two 10Gb/s link.
>
>The L2FWD actually is in a virtual machine in L2FWD pc. I don't mind packet 
>drops if L2FWD in VM on L2FWD do its best. 
>
>Is there an solution cancel rate limiting in linux/dpdk? So, I can know how 
>many packets in lost in 14.4Mpps environments.

Sorry, I am not sure about how to turn off pause frames. But you should try 
running Pktgen on both machines to verify the problem.
>
>
> 
>
>
>On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 11:49 PM, Wiles, Keith 
><keith.wiles at intel.com> wrote:
>
>From: Royce Niu <royceniu at gmail.com>
>Date: Monday, March 7, 2016 at 9:41 AM
>To: Keith Wiles <keith.wiles at intel.com>
>Cc: Royce Niu <royceniu at gmail.com>, "users at dpdk.org" <users at dpdk.org>
>Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Performance Problem of DPDK pkt-gen
>
>
>
>Yes.
>
>The problem is the sending rate is not 14Mpps when L2FWD is working. 
>
>When L2FWD is working, the sending rate is about 4Mpps, instead of 14Mpps. 
>When I close the L2FWD pc, the sending rate recovers to 14Mpps...
>
>I think there is something wrong with my Pktgen PC. Could you help me check my 
>commands? Or is there anything wrong?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>I do not think Pktgen has a problem or the PC on which it runs. I expect the 
>problem is the second PC is not able to keep up with the RX rate and is 
>sending pause packets to the TX machine. The pause packets will reduce the TX 
>rate on the Pktgen PC.
>
>Try running Pktgen on the L2FWD PC and see if the rate drops. If the rate does 
>not drop then the second PC is sending pause frame back to the first PC to do 
>rate limiting on the TX side.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 11:35 PM, Wiles, Keith 
><keith.wiles at intel.com> wrote:
>
>From: Royce Niu <royceniu at gmail.com>
>Date: Monday, March 7, 2016 at 9:30 AM
>To: Keith Wiles <keith.wiles at intel.com>
>Cc: Royce Niu <royceniu at gmail.com>, "users at dpdk.org" <users at dpdk.org>
>Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] Performance Problem of DPDK pkt-gen
>
>
>
>Hi, Keith
>
>Maybe, since I didn't configure the CPU affinity in the L2FWD pc on purpose so 
>far.
>
>But, my question is the first PC have a poor sending rate when L2FWD is 
>working in second PC. 
>
>You mean the problem is related to L2FWD?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>The sending rate of the Pktgen PC should be constant, but the forwarding rate 
>of the second PC maybe the problem because sending packets received on one 
>socket and then being send by another socket is a problem as the QPI bus 
>between sockets is not as
> fast.
>
>
>
>On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 11:26 PM, Wiles, Keith 
><keith.wiles at intel.com> wrote:
>
>>Dear all,
>>
>>I am using an server with 4 cpus (4 x 8 core CPUs with HT) and NICs (X520).
>>
>>When I use pkt-gen on NIC1 or NIC2, the speed of generating 64Byte is
>>14Mpps.
>>
>>If I generating both on NIC1 and NIC2, the speed of  generating 64Byte on
>>both are more than  13Mpps.
>>
>>However, I use same configuration PC (with DPDK L2FWD) to bridge NIC1 and
>>NIC2, so I can generate packet on NIC1 and receive these packets on NIC2 in
>>pkt-gen. The speed of generating is decreased to 4Mpps and the receive rate
>>is 3Mpps.
>
>I am not sure how you configured the second PC for L2FWD, but I suspect the 
>L2FWD is having to receive packets on socket 0 and send the packets on socket 
>1, this means the QPI bus gets involved here. Is this the case?
>
>>
>>
>>I want to know why generating speed is slower than the situation without
>>the bridge of NIC1 and NIC2?  how to solve these problem?
>>
>>The detailed information is as following.
>>
>>sudo sysctl vm.nr_hugepages=4096
>>echo 1024 | sudo tee
>>/sys/devices/system/node/node0/hugepages/hugepages-2048kB/nr_hugepages
>>echo 1024 | sudo tee
>>/sys/devices/system/node/node1/hugepages/hugepages-2048kB/nr_hugepages
>>echo 1024 | sudo tee
>>/sys/devices/system/node/node2/hugepages/hugepages-2048kB/nr_hugepages
>>echo 1024 | sudo tee
>>/sys/devices/system/node/node3/hugepages/hugepages-2048kB/nr_hugepages
>>
>>
>>sudo mkdir -p /dev/hugepages
>>sudo mount -t hugetlbfs nodev /dev/hugepages
>>
>>
>>sudo dpdk-2.2.0/tools/dpdk_nic_bind.py --status
>>sudo modprobe uio
>>sudo insmod dpdk-2.2.0/build/kmod/igb_uio.ko
>>
>>sudo dpdk-2.2.0/tools/dpdk_nic_bind.py -b igb_uio 04:00.0 04:00.1
>>sudo dpdk-2.2.0/tools/dpdk_nic_bind.py --status
>>
>>cd pktgen-2.9.12/
>>
>>sudo app/build/pktgen -c 0x1f -n 3 --proc-type auto --socket-mem
>>128,128,128,128 -- -P -m "[1:3].0, [2:4].1" -f test/set_seq.pkt
>>
>>I tried to change -m, but, sometime there is no packet generated by
>>pkt-gen.
>>
>>
>>The core map is :
>>
>>EAL: Detected lcore 0 as core 0 on socket 0
>>EAL: Detected lcore 1 as core 0 on socket 1
>>EAL: Detected lcore 2 as core 0 on socket 2
>>EAL: Detected lcore 3 as core 0 on socket 3
>>EAL: Detected lcore 4 as core 1 on socket 0
>>EAL: Detected lcore 5 as core 1 on socket 1
>>EAL: Detected lcore 6 as core 1 on socket 2
>>EAL: Detected lcore 7 as core 1 on socket 3
>>EAL: Detected lcore 8 as core 2 on socket 0
>>EAL: Detected lcore 9 as core 2 on socket 1
>>EAL: Detected lcore 10 as core 2 on socket 2
>>EAL: Detected lcore 11 as core 2 on socket 3
>>EAL: Detected lcore 12 as core 3 on socket 0
>>EAL: Detected lcore 13 as core 3 on socket 1
>>EAL: Detected lcore 14 as core 3 on socket 2
>>EAL: Detected lcore 15 as core 3 on socket 3
>>EAL: Detected lcore 16 as core 4 on socket 0
>>EAL: Detected lcore 17 as core 4 on socket 1
>>EAL: Detected lcore 18 as core 4 on socket 2
>>EAL: Detected lcore 19 as core 4 on socket 3
>>EAL: Detected lcore 20 as core 5 on socket 0
>>EAL: Detected lcore 21 as core 5 on socket 1
>>EAL: Detected lcore 22 as core 5 on socket 2
>>EAL: Detected lcore 23 as core 5 on socket 3
>>EAL: Detected lcore 24 as core 6 on socket 0
>>EAL: Detected lcore 25 as core 6 on socket 1
>>EAL: Detected lcore 26 as core 6 on socket 2
>>EAL: Detected lcore 27 as core 6 on socket 3
>>EAL: Detected lcore 28 as core 7 on socket 0
>>EAL: Detected lcore 29 as core 7 on socket 1
>>EAL: Detected lcore 30 as core 7 on socket 2
>>EAL: Detected lcore 31 as core 7 on socket 3
>>EAL: Detected lcore 32 as core 0 on socket 0
>>EAL: Detected lcore 33 as core 0 on socket 1
>>EAL: Detected lcore 34 as core 0 on socket 2
>>EAL: Detected lcore 35 as core 0 on socket 3
>>EAL: Detected lcore 36 as core 1 on socket 0
>>EAL: Detected lcore 37 as core 1 on socket 1
>>EAL: Detected lcore 38 as core 1 on socket 2
>>EAL: Detected lcore 39 as core 1 on socket 3
>>EAL: Detected lcore 40 as core 2 on socket 0
>>EAL: Detected lcore 41 as core 2 on socket 1
>>EAL: Detected lcore 42 as core 2 on socket 2
>>EAL: Detected lcore 43 as core 2 on socket 3
>>EAL: Detected lcore 44 as core 3 on socket 0
>>EAL: Detected lcore 45 as core 3 on socket 1
>>EAL: Detected lcore 46 as core 3 on socket 2
>>EAL: Detected lcore 47 as core 3 on socket 3
>>EAL: Detected lcore 48 as core 4 on socket 0
>>EAL: Detected lcore 49 as core 4 on socket 1
>>EAL: Detected lcore 50 as core 4 on socket 2
>>EAL: Detected lcore 51 as core 4 on socket 3
>>EAL: Detected lcore 52 as core 5 on socket 0
>>EAL: Detected lcore 53 as core 5 on socket 1
>>EAL: Detected lcore 54 as core 5 on socket 2
>>EAL: Detected lcore 55 as core 5 on socket 3
>>EAL: Detected lcore 56 as core 6 on socket 0
>>EAL: Detected lcore 57 as core 6 on socket 1
>>EAL: Detected lcore 58 as core 6 on socket 2
>>EAL: Detected lcore 59 as core 6 on socket 3
>>EAL: Detected lcore 60 as core 7 on socket 0
>>EAL: Detected lcore 61 as core 7 on socket 1
>>EAL: Detected lcore 62 as core 7 on socket 2
>>EAL: Detected lcore 63 as core 7 on socket 3
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>--
>>Regards,
>>
>>Royce Niu
>>
>
>
>
>
>Regards,
>Keith
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-- 
>Regards,
>
>Royce Niu
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Regards,
>Keith
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-- 
>Regards,
>
>Royce Niu
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Regards,
>Keith
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>-- 
>Regards,
>
>Royce Niu
>
>
>
>
>
>
>


Regards,
Keith


Reply via email to