On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Traynor, Kevin <kevin.traynor at intel.com> wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Andrey Korolyov [mailto:andrey at xdel.ru] >> Sent: Tuesday, February 3, 2015 5:21 PM >> To: Traynor, Kevin >> Cc: dev at dpdk.org; discuss at openvswitch.org >> Subject: Re: Packet drops during non-exhaustive flood with OVS and 1.8.0 >> >> > These patches are to enable DPDK 1.8 only. What 'bulk processing' are you >> > referring to? >> > By default there is a batch size of 192 in netdev-dpdk for rx from the NIC >> > - the linked >> > patch doesn't change this, just the DPDK version. >> >> Sorry, I referred the wrong part there: bulk transmission, which is >> clearly not involved in my case. The idea was that the conditionally >> enabling prefetch for rx queues (BULK_ALLOC) may help somehow, but >> it`s probably will mask issue instead of solving it directly. By my >> understanding, strict drop rule should have a zero impact on a main >> ovs thread (and this is true) and work just fine with a line rate >> (this is not). > > I've set a similar drop rule and I'm seeing the first packet drops occurring > at 13.9 mpps for 64 byte pkts. I'm not sure if there is a config that can be > changed or if it just the cost of the emc/lookups >
Do you mind to compare this case with forward to the dummy port (ifconfig dummy0; ovs-vsctl add-port br0 dummy0; ip link set dev dummy0 up; flush rule table; create a single forward rule; start an attack)? As I mentioned there are no signs of syscall congestion for a drop or dpdk-dpdk forward case.
