Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-24 Thread Vijay Singh
Hi, Robert Watson and Adrian have asked me to share some details around an MP design that we have at $work that is based on Robert's PCBGROUP work. Here are some details that I have put together. Design of the network MP system -–--- 1. Reduce locking in th

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-24 Thread Marko Zec
On Tuesday 24 September 2013 10:47:24 Joe Holden wrote: > On 24/09/2013 08:58, Marko Zec wrote: > > On Tuesday 24 September 2013 00:46:46 Sami Halabi wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >>> http://info.iet.unipi.it/~**luigi/papers/20120601-dxr.pdf >>>.i et.unipi.it/~luigi/papers/20120601-dxr.pdf>

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-24 Thread Joe Holden
On 24/09/2013 08:58, Marko Zec wrote: On Tuesday 24 September 2013 00:46:46 Sami Halabi wrote: Hi, http://info.iet.unipi.it/~**luigi/papers/20120601-dxr.pdf http://www.nxlab.fer.hr/dxr/**stable_8_20120824.diff

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-24 Thread Marko Zec
On Tuesday 24 September 2013 00:46:46 Sami Halabi wrote: > Hi, > > > http://info.iet.unipi.it/~**luigi/papers/20120601-dxr.pdf >et.unipi.it/~luigi/papers/20120601-dxr.pdf> > > http://www.nxlab.fer.hr/dxr/**stable_8_20120824.diff >er.hr/dxr/stable_8_20120824.diff

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-23 Thread Sami Halabi
Hi, > http://info.iet.unipi.it/~**luigi/papers/20120601-dxr.pdf > http://www.nxlab.fer.hr/dxr/**stable_8_20120824.diff I've tried the diff in 10-current, applied cleanly but had errors compi

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-23 Thread Slawa Olhovchenkov
On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 11:58:37PM +0400, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote: > I've found the paper I was talking about: > http://info.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/papers/20120601-dxr.pdf > > It claims that our radix is able to do 6MPPS/core and it does not scale > with number of cores. Our radix is bugly an

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-23 Thread Joe Holden
On 23/09/2013 06:34, Adrian Chadd wrote: On 22 September 2013 21:52, Luigi Rizzo wrote: locking affects scalability; but dxr and similar algorithms have much fewer memory lookups, not to mention the huge memory footprint of the freebsd radix tree code. Anyways i'd really encourage you to rea

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-22 Thread Adrian Chadd
On 22 September 2013 21:52, Luigi Rizzo wrote: > locking affects scalability; but dxr and similar algorithms have much fewer > memory lookups, not to mention the huge memory footprint of > the freebsd radix tree code. > > Anyways i'd really encourage you to read the dxr paper, it is short > and

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-22 Thread Luigi Rizzo
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 6:42 AM, Adrian Chadd wrote: > Hi! > > > > On 22 September 2013 13:12, Alexander V. Chernikov < > melif...@yandex-team.ru> wrote: > > >> I'm thinking the same way, but we're stuck with 'forwarding lookup' due >> to problem with egress interface pointer, as I mention earli

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-22 Thread Adrian Chadd
Hi! On 22 September 2013 13:12, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote: > I'm thinking the same way, but we're stuck with 'forwarding lookup' due > to problem with egress interface pointer, as I mention earlier. However it > is interesting to see how much it helps, regardless of locking. > > Currently

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-22 Thread Alexander V. Chernikov
On 14.09.2013 22:49, Olivier Cochard-Labbé wrote: On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Luigi Rizzo wrote: IXIA ? For the timescales we need to address we don't need an IXIA, a netmap sender is more than enough The great netmap generates only one IP flow (same src/dst IP and same src/dst port). Th

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-22 Thread Slawa Olhovchenkov
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 12:01:17AM +0400, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote: > On 29.08.2013 05:32, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: > > On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:24:48AM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote: > > > >>> .. > >>> while Intel DPDK claims 80MPPS (and 6windgate talks about 160 or so) on > >>> the same-c

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-22 Thread Alexander V. Chernikov
On 29.08.2013 15:49, Adrian Chadd wrote: Hi, Hello Adrian! I'm very sorry for the looong reply. There's a lot of good stuff to review here, thanks! Yes, the ixgbe RX lock needs to die in a fire. It's kinda pointless to keep locking things like that on a per-packet basis. We should be able

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-22 Thread Alexander V. Chernikov
On 29.08.2013 05:32, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:24:48AM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote: .. while Intel DPDK claims 80MPPS (and 6windgate talks about 160 or so) on the same-class hardware and _userland_ forwarding. Those numbers sound a bit far out. Maybe if the packet

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-22 Thread Alexander V. Chernikov
On 29.08.2013 02:24, Andre Oppermann wrote: On 28.08.2013 20:30, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote: Hello list! Hello Alexander, Hello Andre! I'm very sorry to answer so late. you sent quite a few things in the same email. I'll try to respond as much as I can right now. Later you should split

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-20 Thread George Neville-Neil
On Sep 19, 2013, at 16:08 , Luigi Rizzo wrote: > On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:54:34PM -0400, George Neville-Neil wrote: >> >> On Sep 14, 2013, at 15:24 , Luigi Rizzo wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Saturday, September 14, 2013, Olivier Cochard-Labb? >>> wrote: On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 4:28 PM,

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-19 Thread Luigi Rizzo
On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 03:54:34PM -0400, George Neville-Neil wrote: > > On Sep 14, 2013, at 15:24 , Luigi Rizzo wrote: > > > > > > > On Saturday, September 14, 2013, Olivier Cochard-Labb? > > wrote: > > > On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Luigi Rizzo wrote: > > >> > > >> IXIA ? For the time

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-19 Thread George Neville-Neil
On Sep 14, 2013, at 15:24 , Luigi Rizzo wrote: > On Saturday, September 14, 2013, Olivier Cochard-Labbé > wrote: >> On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Luigi Rizzo wrote: >>> >>> IXIA ? For the timescales we need to address we don't need an IXIA, >>> a netmap sender is more than enough >>> >>

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-19 Thread George Neville-Neil
On Sep 14, 2013, at 15:24 , Luigi Rizzo wrote: > > > On Saturday, September 14, 2013, Olivier Cochard-Labbé > wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Luigi Rizzo wrote: > >> > >> IXIA ? For the timescales we need to address we don't need an IXIA, > >> a netmap sender is more than enough

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-14 Thread Olivier Cochard-Labbé
On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Luigi Rizzo wrote: > > IXIA ? For the timescales we need to address we don't need an IXIA, > a netmap sender is more than enough > The great netmap generates only one IP flow (same src/dst IP and same src/dst port). This don't permit to test multi-queue NIC (or SM

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-14 Thread Luigi Rizzo
On Saturday, September 14, 2013, Olivier Cochard-Labbé wrote: > On Sat, Sep 14, 2013 at 4:28 PM, Luigi Rizzo wrote: >> >> IXIA ? For the timescales we need to address we don't need an IXIA, >> a netmap sender is more than enough >> > > The great netmap generates only one IP flow (same src/dst IP

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-14 Thread Luigi Rizzo
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:08:27AM -0400, George Neville-Neil wrote: > > On Aug 29, 2013, at 7:49 , Adrian Chadd wrote: ... > One quick note here. Every time you increase batching you may increase > bandwidth > but you will also increase per packet latency for the last packet in a batch. The o

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-14 Thread Luigi Rizzo
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:08:27AM -0400, George Neville-Neil wrote: > > On Aug 29, 2013, at 7:49 , Adrian Chadd wrote: ... > > I still have some tool coding to do with PMC before I even think about > > tinkering with this as I'd like to measure stuff like per-packet latency as > > well as top-le

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-14 Thread Adrian Chadd
On 13 September 2013 15:43, Rick Macklem wrote: > And any time you increase latency, that will have a negative impact on > NFS performance. NFS RPCs are usually small messages (except Write requests > and Read replies) and the RTT for these (mostly small, bidirectional) > messages can have a sig

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-14 Thread Rick Macklem
Sam Fourman Jr. wrote: > > > > > And any time you increase latency, that will have a negative impact > > on > > NFS performance. NFS RPCs are usually small messages (except Write > > requests > > and Read replies) and the RTT for these (mostly small, > > bidirectional) > > messages can have a sign

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-14 Thread Sam Fourman Jr.
> > And any time you increase latency, that will have a negative impact on > NFS performance. NFS RPCs are usually small messages (except Write requests > and Read replies) and the RTT for these (mostly small, bidirectional) > messages can have a significant impact on NFS perf. > > rick > > this m

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-13 Thread Rick Macklem
George Neville-Neil wrote: > > On Aug 29, 2013, at 7:49 , Adrian Chadd wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > There's a lot of good stuff to review here, thanks! > > > > Yes, the ixgbe RX lock needs to die in a fire. It's kinda pointless > > to keep > > locking things like that on a per-packet basis. We sho

Re: Network stack changes

2013-09-13 Thread George Neville-Neil
On Aug 29, 2013, at 7:49 , Adrian Chadd wrote: > Hi, > > There's a lot of good stuff to review here, thanks! > > Yes, the ixgbe RX lock needs to die in a fire. It's kinda pointless to keep > locking things like that on a per-packet basis. We should be able to do > this in a cleaner way - we ca

Re: Network stack changes

2013-08-29 Thread Adrian Chadd
Hi, There's a lot of good stuff to review here, thanks! Yes, the ixgbe RX lock needs to die in a fire. It's kinda pointless to keep locking things like that on a per-packet basis. We should be able to do this in a cleaner way - we can defer RX into a CPU pinned taskqueue and convert the interrupt

Re: Network stack changes

2013-08-28 Thread Bryan Venteicher
- Original Message - > On 28.08.2013 20:30, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote: > > Hello list! > > Hello Alexander, > > you sent quite a few things in the same email. I'll try to respond > as much as I can right now. Later you should split it up to have > more in-depth discussions on the i

Re: Network stack changes

2013-08-28 Thread Slawa Olhovchenkov
On Thu, Aug 29, 2013 at 12:24:48AM +0200, Andre Oppermann wrote: > > .. > > while Intel DPDK claims 80MPPS (and 6windgate talks about 160 or so) on the > > same-class hardware and > > _userland_ forwarding. > > Those numbers sound a bit far out. Maybe if the packet isn't touched > or looked at

Re: Network stack changes

2013-08-28 Thread Andre Oppermann
On 28.08.2013 20:30, Alexander V. Chernikov wrote: Hello list! Hello Alexander, you sent quite a few things in the same email. I'll try to respond as much as I can right now. Later you should split it up to have more in-depth discussions on the individual parts. If you could make it to the

Re: Network stack changes

2013-08-28 Thread Jack Vogel
Very interesting material Alexander, only had time to glance at it now, will look in more depth later, thanks! Jack On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Alexander V. Chernikov < melif...@yandex-team.ru> wrote: > Hello list! > > There is a lot constantly raising discussions related to networking