Great, please send me a link to the related patch set. I can apply them in
our kernel build and try them ASAP!



st 25. 6. 2025 v 16:03 odesílatel Przemek Kitszel <
[email protected]> napsal:

> On 6/25/25 14:17, Jaroslav Pulchart wrote:
> > Hello
> >
> > We are still facing the memory issue with Intel 810 NICs (even on latest
> > 6.15.y).
> >
> > Our current stabilization and solution is to move everything to a new
> > INTEL-FREE server and get rid of last Intel sights there (after Intel's
> > CPU vulnerabilities fuckups NICs are next step).
> >
> > Any help welcomed,
> > Jaroslav P.
> >
> >
>
> Thank you for urging us, I can understand the frustration.
>
> We have identified some (unrelated) memory leaks, will soon ship fixes.
> And, as there were no clear issue with any commit/version you have
> posted to be a culprit, there is a chance that our random findings could
> help. Anyway going to zero kmemleak reports is good in itself, that is
> a good start.
>
> Will ask my VAL too to increase efforts in this area too.
>
> Przemek
>
> >
> > st 4. 6. 2025 v 10:42 odesílatel Jaroslav Pulchart
> > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>
> > napsal:
> >
> >      >
> >      > čt 17. 4. 2025 v 19:52 odesílatel Keller, Jacob E
> >      > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
> napsal:
> >      > >
> >      > >
> >      > >
> >      > > > -----Original Message-----
> >      > > > From: Jakub Kicinski <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]
> >>
> >      > > > Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2025 5:13 PM
> >      > > > To: Keller, Jacob E <[email protected]
> >     <mailto:[email protected]>>
> >      > > > Cc: Jaroslav Pulchart <[email protected]
> >     <mailto:[email protected]>>; Kitszel, Przemyslaw
> >      > > > <[email protected]
> >     <mailto:[email protected]>>; Damato, Joe
> >     <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; intel-wired-
> >      > > > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>;
> >     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>; Nguyen,
> >     Anthony L
> >      > > > <[email protected]
> >     <mailto:[email protected]>>; Igor Raits <[email protected]
> >     <mailto:[email protected]>>; Daniel Secik
> >      > > > <[email protected]
> >     <mailto:[email protected]>>; Zdenek Pesek
> >     <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>;
> >      > > > Dumazet, Eric <[email protected]
> >     <mailto:[email protected]>>; Martin Karsten
> >      > > > <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; Zaki,
> >     Ahmed <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>; Czapnik,
> >      > > > Lukasz <[email protected]
> >     <mailto:[email protected]>>; Michal Swiatkowski
> >      > > > <[email protected]
> >     <mailto:[email protected]>>
> >      > > > Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] Increased memory usage on NUMA
> >     nodes with ICE
> >      > > > driver after upgrade to 6.13.y (regression in commit
> >     492a044508ad)
> >      > > >
> >      > > > On Wed, 16 Apr 2025 22:57:10 +0000 Keller, Jacob E wrote:
> >      > > > > > > And you're reverting just and exactly 492a044508ad13 ?
> >      > > > > > > The memory for persistent config is allocated in
> >     alloc_netdev_mqs()
> >      > > > > > > unconditionally. I'm lost as to how this commit could
> >     make any
> >      > > > > > > difference :(
> >      > > > > >
> >      > > > > > Yes, reverted the 492a044508ad13.
> >      > > > >
> >      > > > > Struct napi_config *is* 1056 bytes
> >      > > >
> >      > > > You're probably looking at 6.15-rcX kernels. Yes, the
> >     affinity mask
> >      > > > can be large depending on the kernel config. But report is
> >     for 6.13,
> >      > > > AFAIU. In 6.13 and 6.14 napi_config was tiny.
> >      > >
> >      > > Regardless, it should still be ~64KB even in that case which is
> >     a far cry from eating all available memory. Something else must be
> >     going on....
> >      > >
> >      > > Thanks,
> >      > > Jake
> >      >
> >      > Hello
> >      >
> >      > Some observation, this "problem" still exists with the latest
> 6.14.y
> >      > and there must be multiple issues, the memory utilization is
> slowly
> >      > going down, from 3GB to 100MB in 10-20days. at home NUMA nodes
> where
> >      > intel x810 NIC are (looks like some memory leak related to
> >      > networking).
> >      >
> >      > So without the revert the kawadX usage is observed asap like till
> >      > 1-2d, with revert of mentioned commit kswadX starts to consume
> >      > resources later like in ~10d-20d later. It is almost impossible
> >     to use
> >      > servers with Intel X810 cards (ice driver) with recent linux
> kernels.
> >      >
> >      > Were you able to reproduce the memory problems in your testbed?
> >      >
> >      > Best,
> >      > Jaroslav
> >
> >     Hello
> >
> >     I deployed linux 6.15.0 to our servers 7d ago and observed the
> >     behaviour of memory utilization of NUMA home nodes of Intel X810
> >     1/ there is no need to revert the commit as before,
> >     2/ the memory is continuously consumed (like memory leak),
> >     see attached "7d_memory_usage_per_numa_linux6.15.0.png" screenshot 8x
> >     numa nodes, (NUMA0 + NUMA1 are local for X810 nics). BTW: We do not
> >     see this memory utilization pattern on server s using Broadcom
> >     Netxtreme-E NICs
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Jaroslav Pulchart
> > Sr. Principal SW Engineer
> > GoodData
>
>

-- 
Jaroslav Pulchart
Sr. Principal SW Engineer
GoodData

Reply via email to