On 03/24/2017 08:51 PM, Navdeep Parhar wrote:
> On 03/24/2017 16:53, Caraballo-vega, Jordan A. (GSFC-6062)[COMPUTER
> SCIENCE CORP] wrote:
>> It looks like netmap is there; however, is there a way of figuring out
>> if netmap is being used?
>
> If you're not running netmap-fwd or some other netmap
On 03/24/2017 16:53, Caraballo-vega, Jordan A. (GSFC-6062)[COMPUTER
SCIENCE CORP] wrote:
It looks like netmap is there; however, is there a way of figuring out
if netmap is being used?
If you're not running netmap-fwd or some other netmap application, it's
not being used. You have just 1 txq/
It looks like netmap is there; however, is there a way of figuring out
if netmap is being used?
root@router1:~ # dmesg | grep cxl
cxl0: on t5nex0
cxl0: Ethernet address: 00:07:43:2c:ac:50
cxl0: 16 txq, 8 rxq (NIC)
vcxl0: on cxl0
vcxl0: netmap queues/slots: TX 2/1023, RX 2/1024
vcxl0: 1 txq, 1 rx
On 03/24/2017 16:07, Caraballo-vega, Jordan A. (GSFC-6062)[COMPUTER
SCIENCE CORP] wrote:
At the time of implementing the vcxl* interfaces we get very bad results.
You're probably not using netmap with the vcxl interfaces, and the
number of "normal" tx and rx queues is just 2 for these interfac
At the time of implementing the vcxl* interfaces we get very bad results.
packets errs idrops bytespackets errs bytes colls drops
629k 4.5k 066M 629k 066M 0 0
701k 5.0k 074M 701k 074M 0 0
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 11:43:32PM -0400, John Jasen wrote:
> On 03/17/2017 03:32 PM, Navdeep Parhar wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 12:21 PM, John Jasen wrote:
> >> Yes.
> >> We were hopeful, initially, to be able to achieve higher packet
> >> forwarding rates through either netmap-fwd or d
On 03/17/2017 03:32 PM, Navdeep Parhar wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 12:21 PM, John Jasen wrote:
>> Yes.
>> We were hopeful, initially, to be able to achieve higher packet
>> forwarding rates through either netmap-fwd or due to enhancements based
>> off https://wiki.freebsd.org/ProjectsRouting
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 03:21:37PM -0400, John Jasen wrote:
> On 03/17/2017 06:08 AM, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:50:42PM -0400, John Jasen wrote:
> >
> >> As a few points of note, partial resolution, and curiosity:
> >>
> >> Following down leads that 11-STABLE had
On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 12:21 PM, John Jasen wrote:
> On 03/17/2017 06:08 AM, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:50:42PM -0400, John Jasen wrote:
>>
>>> As a few points of note, partial resolution, and curiosity:
>>>
>>> Following down leads that 11-STABLE had tryforward imp
On 03/17/2017 06:08 AM, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:50:42PM -0400, John Jasen wrote:
>
>> As a few points of note, partial resolution, and curiosity:
>>
>> Following down leads that 11-STABLE had tryforward improvements over
>> 11-RELENG, I upgraded. The same tests (24 c
On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 03:50:42PM -0400, John Jasen wrote:
> As a few points of note, partial resolution, and curiosity:
>
> Following down leads that 11-STABLE had tryforward improvements over
> 11-RELENG, I upgraded. The same tests (24 client streams over UDP with
> small packets), the system
As a few points of note, partial resolution, and curiosity:
Following down leads that 11-STABLE had tryforward improvements over
11-RELENG, I upgraded. The same tests (24 client streams over UDP with
small packets), the system went from passing 1.7m pps to about 2.5m.
Following indications from N
On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 10:13 AM, John Jasen wrote:
> On 03/13/2017 01:03 PM, Navdeep Parhar wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 5:35 PM, John Jasen wrote:
>>> UDP traffic. dmesg reports 16 txq, 8 rxq -- which is the default for
>>> Chelsio.
>>>
>> I don't recall offhand, but UDP might be using 2
The issue does not seem to be specific to Chelsio cards. The same tests
with Mellanix cards using the mlx4 drivers exhibit similar behaviors and
results.
On 03/12/2017 06:13 PM, John Jasen wrote:
> I think I am able to confirm Mr. Caraballo's findings.
>
>
_
On 03/13/2017 01:03 PM, Navdeep Parhar wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 5:35 PM, John Jasen wrote:
>> UDP traffic. dmesg reports 16 txq, 8 rxq -- which is the default for
>> Chelsio.
>>
> I don't recall offhand, but UDP might be using 2-tuple hashing by
> default and that might affect the distrib
On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 5:35 PM, John Jasen wrote:
>
> UDP traffic. dmesg reports 16 txq, 8 rxq -- which is the default for
> Chelsio.
>
I don't recall offhand, but UDP might be using 2-tuple hashing by
default and that might affect the distribution of flows across queues.
Are there senders gener
n 03/12/2017 07:18 PM, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 06:13:46PM -0400, John Jasen wrote:
>
> what traffic you generated (TCP? UDP? ICMP? other?), what reported in
> dmesg | grep txq ?
UDP traffic. dmesg reports 16 txq, 8 rxq -- which is the default for
Chelsio.
___
On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 06:13:46PM -0400, John Jasen wrote:
> I think I am able to confirm Mr. Caraballo's findings.
>
> I pulled a Dell PowerEdge 720 out of production, and upgraded it to
> 11-RELEASE-p8.
>
> Currently, as in the R530, it has a single Chelsio T5-580, but has two
> v2 Intel E5-2
I think I am able to confirm Mr. Caraballo's findings.
I pulled a Dell PowerEdge 720 out of production, and upgraded it to
11-RELEASE-p8.
Currently, as in the R530, it has a single Chelsio T5-580, but has two
v2 Intel E5-26xx CPUs versus the newer ones in the R530.
Both ports are configured for
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 3:13 AM, Caraballo-vega, Jordan A.
(GSFC-6062)[COMPUTER SCIENCE CORP] wrote:
> As a summarywe have a Dell R530 with a Chelsio T580 cardwith -CURRENT.
>
> In an attempt to reduce the time the system was taking to look for the
> cpus; we changed the BIOS setting to let the s
Did you compile and installed GENERIC-NODEBUG kernel for the CURRENT test?
On Tue, Feb 28, 2017 at 10:13 AM, Caraballo-vega, Jordan A.
(GSFC-6062)[COMPUTER SCIENCE CORP]
wrote:
> As a summarywe have a Dell R530 with a Chelsio T580 cardwith -CURRENT.
>
> In an attempt to reduce the time the syste
As a summarywe have a Dell R530 with a Chelsio T580 cardwith -CURRENT.
In an attempt to reduce the time the system was taking to look for the
cpus; we changed the BIOS setting to let the system have 8 visible cores
and tested cxl* and vcxl* chelsio interfaces. Scores are still way lower
than what
22 matches
Mail list logo
