On 11/05/2023 08:33, Jiang, YuX wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Traynor <ktray...@redhat.com>
Sent: Monday, May 8, 2023 11:24 PM
To: Xu, HailinX <hailinx...@intel.com>; sta...@dpdk.org
Cc: Stokes, Ian <ian.sto...@intel.com>; Mcnamara, John
<john.mcnam...@intel.com>; Luca Boccassi <bl...@debian.org>; Xu, Qian Q
<qian.q...@intel.com>; Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net>; Peng,
Yuan <yuan.p...@intel.com>; Chen, Zhaoyan <zhaoyan.c...@intel.com>;
dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: 21.11.4 patches review and test
On 05/05/2023 02:42, Xu, HailinX wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Traynor <ktray...@redhat.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 4, 2023 6:11 PM
To: Xu, HailinX <hailinx...@intel.com>; sta...@dpdk.org
Cc: Stokes, Ian <ian.sto...@intel.com>; Mcnamara, John
<john.mcnam...@intel.com>; Luca Boccassi <bl...@debian.org>; Xu,
Qian
Q <qian.q...@intel.com>; Thomas Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net>;
Peng,
Yuan <yuan.p...@intel.com>; Chen, Zhaoyan
<zhaoyan.c...@intel.com>;
dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: 21.11.4 patches review and test
On 04/05/2023 03:13, Xu, HailinX wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Traynor <ktray...@redhat.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 2, 2023 5:35 PM
To: Xu, HailinX <hailinx...@intel.com>; sta...@dpdk.org
Cc: Stokes, Ian <ian.sto...@intel.com>; Mcnamara, John
<john.mcnam...@intel.com>; Luca Boccassi <bl...@debian.org>; Xu,
Qian Q <qian.q...@intel.com>; Thomas Monjalon
<tho...@monjalon.net>;
Peng,
Yuan <yuan.p...@intel.com>; Chen, Zhaoyan
<zhaoyan.c...@intel.com>;
dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: 21.11.4 patches review and test
On 20/04/2023 11:32, Kevin Traynor wrote:
On 20/04/2023 03:40, Xu, HailinX wrote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Xu, HailinX <hailinx...@intel.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 13, 2023 2:13 PM
To: Kevin Traynor <ktray...@redhat.com>; sta...@dpdk.org
Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Abhishek Marathe
<abhishek.mara...@microsoft.com>;
Ali Alnubani <alia...@nvidia.com>; Walker, Benjamin
<benjamin.wal...@intel.com>; David Christensen
<d...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>; Hemant Agrawal
<hemant.agra...@nxp.com>;
Stokes, Ian <ian.sto...@intel.com>; Jerin Jacob
<jer...@marvell.com>; Mcnamara, John
<john.mcnam...@intel.com>;
Ju-Hyoung Lee <juh...@microsoft.com>; Luca Boccassi
<bl...@debian.org>; Pei Zhang <pezh...@redhat.com>; Xu, Qian
Q
<qian.q...@intel.com>; Raslan Darawsheh <rasl...@nvidia.com>;
Thomas
Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net>; yangh...@redhat.com; Peng,
Yuan
<yuan.p...@intel.com>; Chen, Zhaoyan
<zhaoyan.c...@intel.com>
Subject: RE: 21.11.4 patches review and test
-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin Traynor <ktray...@redhat.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 6, 2023 7:38 PM
To: sta...@dpdk.org
Cc: dev@dpdk.org; Abhishek Marathe
<abhishek.mara...@microsoft.com>; Ali Alnubani
<alia...@nvidia.com>; Walker, Benjamin
<benjamin.wal...@intel.com>; David Christensen
<d...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>; Hemant Agrawal
<hemant.agra...@nxp.com>; Stokes, Ian
<ian.sto...@intel.com>;
Jerin Jacob <jer...@marvell.com>; Mcnamara, John
<john.mcnam...@intel.com>; Ju-Hyoung Lee
<juh...@microsoft.com>;
Kevin Traynor <ktray...@redhat.com>; Luca Boccassi
<bl...@debian.org>; Pei Zhang <pezh...@redhat.com>; Xu,
Qian Q
<qian.q...@intel.com>; Raslan Darawsheh <rasl...@nvidia.com>;
Thomas
Monjalon <tho...@monjalon.net>; yangh...@redhat.com; Peng,
Yuan
<yuan.p...@intel.com>; Chen, Zhaoyan
<zhaoyan.c...@intel.com>
Subject: 21.11.4 patches review and test
Hi all,
Here is a list of patches targeted for stable release 21.11.4.
The planned date for the final release is 25th April.
Please help with testing and validation of your use cases and
report any issues/results with reply-all to this mail. For the
final release the fixes and reported validations will be added
to the
release notes.
A release candidate tarball can be found at:
https://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk-stable/tag/?id=v21.11.4-rc1
These patches are located at branch 21.11 of dpdk-stable repo:
https://dpdk.org/browse/dpdk-stable/
Thanks.
Kevin
HI All,
Update the test status for Intel part. Till now dpdk21.11.4-rc1
validation test rate is 85%. No critical issue is found.
2 new bugs are found, 1 new issue is under confirming by Intel Dev.
New bugs: --20.11.8-rc1 also has these two issues
1.
pvp_qemu_multi_paths_port_restart:perf_pvp_qemu_vector_rx_mac:
performance drop about 23.5% when send small packets
https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1212 -- no fix yet
2. some of the virtio tests are failing: -- Intel dev is under
investigating
# Basic Intel(R) NIC testing
* Build & CFLAG compile: cover the build test combination with
latest GCC/Clang version and the popular OS revision such as
Ubuntu20.04, Ubuntu22.04, Fedora35, Fedora37, RHEL8.6,
RHEL8.4, FreeBSD13.1, SUSE15, CentOS7.9, etc.
- All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
* PF(i40e, ixgbe): test scenarios including
RTE_FLOW/TSO/Jumboframe/checksum offload/VLAN/VXLAN, etc.
- All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
* VF(i40e, ixgbe): test scenarios including
VF-RTE_FLOW/TSO/Jumboframe/checksum offload/VLAN/VXLAN,
etc.
- All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
* PF/VF(ice): test scenarios including Switch features/Package
Management/Flow Director/Advanced Tx/Advanced
RSS/ACL/DCF/Flexible
Descriptor, etc.
- All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
* Intel NIC single core/NIC performance: test scenarios
including PF/VF single core performance test, etc.
- All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
* IPsec: test scenarios including ipsec/ipsec-gw/ipsec library
basic test - QAT&SW/FIB library, etc.
- On going.
# Basic cryptodev and virtio testing
* Virtio: both function and performance test are covered. Such
as PVP/Virtio_loopback/virtio-user loopback/virtio-net VM2VM
perf testing/VMAWARE ESXI 8.0, etc.
- All test done. found bug1.
* Cryptodev:
*Function test: test scenarios including Cryptodev API
testing/CompressDev ISA-L/QAT/ZLIB PMD Testing/FIPS, etc.
- Execution rate is 90%. found bug2.
*Performance test: test scenarios including Thoughput
Performance/Cryptodev Latency, etc.
- All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
Regards,
Xu, Hailin
Update the test status for Intel part. completed dpdk21.11.4-rc1
all
validation. No critical issue is found.
Hi. Thanks for testing.
2 new bugs are found, 1 new issue is under confirming by Intel Dev.
New bugs: --20.11.8-rc1 also has these two issues
1.
pvp_qemu_multi_paths_port_restart:perf_pvp_qemu_vector_rx_mac:
performance drop about 23.5% when send small packets
https://bugs.dpdk.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1212 --not fix yet,
Only
the specified platform exists
Do you know which patch caaused the regression? I'm not fully
clear from the Bz for 20.11. The backported patch ID'd as root
cause [0] in
20.11 is in the previous releases of 20.11 (and 21.11).
Trying to understand because then it would have shown in testing
for previous releases. Or is this a new test introduced for latest
LTS releases? and if so, what is the baseline performance based on?
[0]
commit 1c9a7fba5c90e0422b517404499ed106f647bcff
Author: Mattias Rönnblom <mattias.ronnb...@ericsson.com>
Date: Mon Jul 11 14:11:32 2022 +0200
net: accept unaligned data in checksum routines
2. some of the virtio tests are failing: -- Intel dev is
under investigating
ok, thank you.
Hi, it was mentioned in a separate mail that the performance drop
issue was not the same as 20.11.
Is there any update on that and the failing virtio tests ? Is there
a regression introduced since in 21.11.4 ?
Found bad commit id:
commit c41493361c87e730459ead9311c68528eb0874aa
Author: Boleslav Stankevich <boleslav.stankev...@oktetlabs.ru>
Date: Fri Mar 3 14:19:29 2023 +0300
net/virtio: deduce IP length for TSO checksum
We try this issue on 3 different platforms Performance drop only
found on Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8280M CPU @ 2.70GHz CPU.
Ok, thanks for reporting. This commit was also in 23.03 and 20.11.8
so not sure if they were tested on this platform?
Yes, But 23.03 doesn't have such issue on the same platform
ok, thanks.
This commit fixes a functional issue, so I don't think it should be
removed unless it is critical issue.
There's no update on other performance report. Release is already 1
week overdue, is there critical issues that we should hold release for?
No other issues found
I'm not fully clear on the status, so let's separate. There were two reported
issues.
1. Performance drop on specific Intel platform.
- Is this being investigated by Intel dev?
- Is it is a release blocking issue ?
2. Virtio issue caused by
commit c41493361c87e730459ead9311c68528eb0874aa
Author: Boleslav Stankevich <boleslav.stankev...@oktetlabs.ru>
Date: Fri Mar 3 14:19:29 2023 +0300
net/virtio: deduce IP length for TSO checksum
- Is this being investigated by Intel dev?
- Is it is a release blocking issue ?
thanks,
Kevin.
Hi Kevin,
Hi Yu Jang,
Thanks for the information.
I need correct/clarify the description of the two issues:
1, Performance drop on specific Intel platform -> should be
pvp_qemu_multi_paths_port_restart:perf_pvp_qemu_vector_rx_mac: Benchmark pvp
performance drop about 23.5% when send small packets"
Its bad commit id:
commit c41493361c87e730459ead9311c68528eb0874aa
Author: Boleslav Stankevich <boleslav.stankev...@oktetlabs.ru>
Date: Fri Mar 3 14:19:29 2023 +0300
net/virtio: deduce IP length for TSO checksum
[ upstream commit d069c80a5d8c0a05033932421851cdb7159de0df ]
The length of TSO payload could not fit into 16 bits provided by the
IPv4 total length and IPv6 payload length fields. Thus, deduce it
from the length of the packet.
Fixes: 696573046e9e ("net/virtio: support TSO")
Signed-off-by: Boleslav Stankevich <boleslav.stankev...@oktetlabs.ru>
Reviewed-by: Andrew Rybchenko <andrew.rybche...@oktetlabs.ru>
Reviewed-by: Maxime Coquelin <maxime.coque...@redhat.com>
Intel validation owner has done lots of verification and compared these performance
data on 8280&8380 platforms.
This performance big drop is only found on special platform (Intel(R) Xeon(R)
Platinum 8280M CPU @ 2.70GHz CPU) when vhost-user(back-end)
and virtio-pmd(front-end) are not on the same socket (front-end is on the
socket1, back-end and nic are on the socket0).
But our test case doesn't call this bad commit id's related code, suspect
whether it may be related to compiler optimization on special platform.
We hope the bad commit id owner or other experts can support to analysis the
root cause.
ok, for this one, it is a performance drop on a single test on a
specific Intel platform and inter-socket related. It does not appear to
be related to the commit being ID'd. To revert the commit would
re-introduce a functional issue.
2, Virtio issue -> should be virtio crypto test failure.
It is not a regression issue, old lts and main branch also reproduce by
validation owner, and there's no clear bad commit id found.
Intel dev and validation owner are investigating it, but we don't find out the
root cause yet.
ok, this is not a regression in 21.11.4.
On that basis, I will go ahead with the 21.11.4 release tomorrow. If
there's any objection please let me know by end of day today.
thanks,
Kevin.
Best regards,
Yu Jiang
Regards,
Xu, Hailin
thanks,
Kevin.
Regards,
Xu, Hailin
thanks,
Kevin,
Kevin.
# Basic Intel(R) NIC testing
* Build & CFLAG compile: cover the build test combination with
latest
GCC/Clang version and the popular OS revision such as
Ubuntu20.04, Ubuntu22.04, Fedora35, Fedora37, RHEL8.6,
RHEL8.4,
FreeBSD13.1, SUSE15, CentOS7.9, etc.
- All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
* PF(i40e, ixgbe): test scenarios including
RTE_FLOW/TSO/Jumboframe/checksum offload/VLAN/VXLAN, etc.
- All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
* VF(i40e, ixgbe): test scenarios including
VF-RTE_FLOW/TSO/Jumboframe/checksum offload/VLAN/VXLAN, etc.
- All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
* PF/VF(ice): test scenarios including Switch features/Package
Management/Flow Director/Advanced Tx/Advanced
RSS/ACL/DCF/Flexible
Descriptor, etc.
- All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
* Intel NIC single core/NIC performance: test scenarios including
PF/VF
single core performance test, etc.
- All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
* IPsec: test scenarios including ipsec/ipsec-gw/ipsec library
basic test -
QAT&SW/FIB library, etc.
- All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
# Basic cryptodev and virtio testing
* Virtio: both function and performance test are covered. Such as
PVP/Virtio_loopback/virtio-user loopback/virtio-net VM2VM perf
testing/VMAWARE ESXI 8.0, etc.
- All test done. found bug1.
* Cryptodev:
*Function test: test scenarios including Cryptodev API
testing/CompressDev ISA-L/QAT/ZLIB PMD Testing/FIPS, etc.
- All test done. found bug2.
*Performance test: test scenarios including Thoughput
Performance/Cryptodev Latency, etc.
- All test done. No new dpdk issue is found.
Regards,
Xu, Hailin
