I don't have clear performance figures for this yet, but I expect that the improvement will remain.
By adding more fields to specify a rule - like MAC src/dest, VlanTci, ToS,.. - more combinations will be available to set different flows. So the number of subtables will increase and that affects the performance of the original dpcls. I did the following test on the original dpcls where EMC was by-passed. I set 1 Flow as add-flow br0 in_port=1,action=output:2 => dpcls used 1 subtable, max throughput: 4.7 Mpps Then I set 7 Flows by combining ProtocolType, IP dest, MAC Src, Port dest, ToS, VlanTci. => dpcls used 6 subtables, max throughtput went down to: 2.2 Mpps > -----Original Message----- > From: Ben Pfaff [mailto:b...@ovn.org] > Sent: Monday, May 2, 2016 10:16 PM > To: Fischetti, Antonio <antonio.fische...@intel.com> > Cc: dev@openvswitch.org > Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH RFC] dpif-netdev: ACL+dpcls for > Wildcard matching. > > This is a significant performance advantage. Does the improvement > remain with large and complex flow tables? These flow tables are > very > simple. > > On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 08:21:11AM +0000, Fischetti, Antonio wrote: > > Hi Ben, > > below are 2 examples. > > > > For both cases: > > * EMC was bypassed > > * using a bridge with 2 dpdk ports > > * I've sent data at line rate on one port and just read the > received rate on the other port, > > regardless of lost packets. > > > > > > Case A: 7 Flows > > ============ > > Original dpcls: 5.74 Mpps > > ACL + dpcls: 7.03 Mpps > > > > The 7 Flows were installed as: > > ovs-ofctl add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.20,nw_dst=34.35.36.37,action=output:2 > > ovs-ofctl add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.19,action=output:2 > > ovs-ofctl add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.18,action=output:2 > > ovs-ofctl add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.17,action=output:2 > > ovs-ofctl add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.16,action=output:2 > > ovs-ofctl add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.15,action=output:2 > > ovs-ofctl add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.14,nw_dst=34.35.36.37,action=output:2 > > > > > > Case B: 17 Flows > > ============= > > Original dpcls: 2.95 Mpps > > ACL+dpcls: 4.67 Mpps > > > > The 17 Flows were installed as: > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_src=17.18.19.20,nw_dst=34.35.36.37,acti > on=output:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_src=17.18.19.20,nw_dst=34.35.36.38,udp_ > dst=4369,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_src=17.18.19.19,udp_src=4369,action=out > put:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_src=17.18.19.18,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_src=17.18.19.17,udp_dst=4369,action=out > put:2 > > add-flow br0 dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.16,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.15,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.14,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_src=17.18.19.13,udp_src=4369,action=out > put:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_src=17.18.19.10,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.9,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.8,nw_dst=34.35.36.37,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_src=17.18.19.8,nw_dst=34.35.36.38,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_src=17.18.19.7,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_src=17.18.19.6,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 > dl_type=0x0800,nw_proto=17,nw_dst=34.35.36.37,action=output:2 > > add-flow br0 dl_type=0x0800,nw_dst=34.35.36.38,action=output:2 > > > > For more details, please let me know. > > > > Thanks, > > Antonio > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Ben Pfaff [mailto:b...@ovn.org] > > > Sent: Thursday, April 21, 2016 7:41 PM > > > To: Fischetti, Antonio <antonio.fische...@intel.com> > > > Cc: dev@openvswitch.org > > > Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH RFC] dpif-netdev: ACL+dpcls for > Wildcard > > > matching. > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 13, 2016 at 10:45:09AM +0100, > antonio.fische...@intel.com > > > wrote: > > > > The purpose of this implementation is to improve the > performance > > > > of wildcard matching in user-space. > > > > This RFC patch shows the basic functionality, some aspects were > not > > > > covered yet. > > > > > > > > I would like to get some feedback on whether people think > integrating > > > > the DPDK ACL table in this manner is potentially a good > solution or not. > > > > > > > > DPDK ACL tables show a better performance on lookup operations > than the > > > > Classifier. However their insertion time for new rules is > unacceptable. > > > > This solution attempts to combine the better performance of ACL > lookups > > > > with the lower insertion latency of the Classifier. > > > > > > How much does the performance improve? _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
