Hi Jason, >try the same test with 0.0.20180620 and 0.0.20180625 The Ubuntu ppa only contains version 0.0.20180625 as far as I can see (apt-cache madison wireguard), so I only measured this version. It's a bit (+0.1 Mpps) faster across the board and does drop to zero later (~2.5 Mpps load). See the graph for details: https://github.com/pudelkoM/MoonWire/blob/master/benchmarks/wireguard/results/0.0.20180625/encrypt-64.pdf
>Care to share your benchmark scripts? No problem, but I doubt that these are integrate-able into a build pipeline because they depend on libmoon (Lua wrapper for DPDK), require at least 10 Gbit NICs and some manual data collection. https://github.com/pudelkoM/MoonWire/tree/master/benchmarks FYI: I'm also working on a WireGuard prototype based on DPDK to see the performance impact of different network stacks. A very early version that just receives, encrypts and forwards packets reaches around 1.4 Mpps _on a single core_, so pretty promising if that can be scaled up. But that's very far away from done (no handshakes, hardcoded keys, single session, ...). See the same repository for source. Max 2018-06-26 17:57 GMT+00:00 Jason A. Donenfeld <[email protected]>: > Hi Max, > > Thanks for doing this test; that's super useful. What you're > describing is definitely not expected behavior. Think you could try > the same test with 0.0.20180620 and 0.0.20180625? In particular, I'm > interested to know whether a performance _regression_ introduced in > 0.0.20180620 actually results in the correct behavior. > > Meanwhile, we (CC'd) have been working on implementing a lockfree > queue structure, but we haven't seen any configurations yet where this > actually results in a performance improvement. > > Care to share your benchmark scripts? Sounds like this could be really > useful for directing our optimizations. > > Jason _______________________________________________ WireGuard mailing list [email protected] https://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/wireguard
