Maciek, really thanks! 2016-11-30 12:36 GMT+08:00 Alec Hothan (ahothan) <ahot...@cisco.com>:
> > > Thanks for putting this together! > > A few preliminary general comments which we can discuss Wednesday. > > > > *2p1nic vs 1p1nic*: > > I know lots of vswitch benchmarks love pairing phys interfaces as it is > easier to scale with more cores… > > But a lot of openstack deployments will come with 1 physical port for all > the tenant traffic. In that case, looping traffic will come in through a > vlan and go out to another vlan (vlan case) or come in through a vxlan > tunnel and go out another vxlan tunnel (VxLAN overlay). The maximum > throughput is 10G in and 10 G out, less wires on the compute nodes and less > ports on the TOR. > > > > I’m not sure there are/will be many deployments with 2 independent > physical ports for tenant traffic. At 30 nodes per rack that makes it 60 > ports per TOR just for the tenant traffic…. If you factor in bonding, that > would make it 4 wires per compute node instead of 2. > > For those deployments that really need more than a 10G link, they might > just use 1 40G link (or 2 bonded links) rather than 2 individual 10G links. > > Neutron supports multiple interfaces but it looks harder to manage (I > guess you need to split your vlan range in 2 but in the case of vxlan > overlay I’m not sure how that can be managed. > > > > I’d like to hear from others whether we should focus on 1p1nic first. It > just seems to me this might be more representative of real NFV deployments > than 2p1nic. > > > > > > *Test topologies of interest for OpenStack*: > > > > Could we mark all those test topologies that are applicable to OpenStack? > Or more generally describe the use case for each test topology. > > I don’t think OpenStack will use any l2xc in vpp. > > > > OpenStack ML2/VPP/VLAN will use dot1q-l2bdbase-eth-2vhost-1vm > > OpenStack VPP/VxLAN will use ethip4vxlan-l2bdbase-eth-2vhost-1vm > > > > *VM images*: > > > > I think vsperf is using testpmd. I know some other perf teams use l2fwd. > > In our team, we use VPP l2 x-connect in the VM (what you call vswitch VPP) > and evaluating testpmd and they don’t seem to differ to much in results. > Seems like testpmd is the way to go for L2… > > > > Would also be good to have the VM image creation scripted – so that > anybody can recreate them from scratch. We use DIB (openstack disk image > builder) for creating our VM images but any other scripted solution should > work. > > For easier reuse inside openstack, the config of the VM instance must be > as automatic as possible. That is easy for the L2 case (just cross connect > between the 2 virtual interfaces). For the L3 case, the L3 config should be > done through config drive (not SSH). > > > > > > That’s it for now, > > > > Alec > > > > > > > > > > *From: *"Maciek Konstantynowicz (mkonstan)" <mkons...@cisco.com> > *Date: *Tuesday, November 29, 2016 at 6:27 PM > *To: *Thomas F Herbert <therb...@redhat.com>, vpp-dev <vpp-dev@lists.fd.io>, > "csit-...@lists.fd.io" <csit-...@lists.fd.io>, "Pierre Pfister > (ppfister)" <ppfis...@cisco.com>, Andrew Theurer <atheu...@redhat.com>, > Douglas Shakshober <dsh...@redhat.com>, Rashid Khan <rk...@redhat.com>, > Karl Rister <kris...@redhat.com>, Irene Liew <irene.l...@intel.com>, > "Alec Hothan (ahothan)" <ahot...@cisco.com>, Damon Wang < > damon.dev...@gmail.com> > *Subject: *Re: [vpp-dev] vHost user test scenarios for CSIT > > > > All, > > > > Here is the first draft: > > https://wiki.fd.io/view/CSIT/vhostuser_test_scenarios > > > > I did my best to capture all inputs as per this thread. But it’s hardly > readable yet - requires more TLC :) > > See what you think - feel free to add/edit things directly on FD.io > <http://fd.io> wiki page. > > > > Suggest to discuss next steps on csit weekly call tomorrow, details here: > > https://wiki.fd.io/view/CSIT/Meeting > > > -Maciek > > > > On 28 Nov 2016, at 07:37, Thomas F Herbert <therb...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > All, > > At last week's CSIT meeting, Maciek (mkons...@cisco.com) offered to > compile a summary suggestions on this mailing list. > > > > On 11/22/2016 11:34 AM, Pierre Pfister (ppfister) wrote: > > Hello Thomas, > > > > Sorry I haven't reached out faster, I was travelling. > > > > Please have a look at vppsb/vhost-test > > It includes a standalone script which provides VPP and VM configuration > for PVP tests. > > - Runs testpmd in the VM > > - Supports various CPU configuration for VPP > > - Can run with or without gdb, debug or release > > > > Not committed yet: > > - Supports VM restart > > - Support for VPP restart > > - Support for multiple additional (dead) vhost interface > > > > I did that outside of the context of CSIT so people can: > > - Look at it and see what are the optimisations that are used > > - Use it without CSIT > > > > I will keep using and improving it because I use it for my own development > and testing purposes. > > > > Rest of this inline. > > > > Le 8 nov. 2016 à 22:25, Thomas F Herbert <therb...@redhat.com> a écrit : > > > > All: > > Soliciting opinions from people as to vhost-user testing scenarios and > guest modes in fd.io CSIT testing of VPP - vhost-user. > > I will forward to this mailing list as well as summarize any additional > feedback. > > I asked some people that happen to be here at OVSCON as well as some Red > Hat and Intel people. I am also including some people that are involved in > upstream vhost-user work in DPDK. > > So far, I have the following feedback with an attempt to condense feedback > and to keep the list small. If I left out anything, let me know. > > In addition to the PVP tests done now with small packets. > > Testpmd in guest is OK for now. > > 1 Add multiple VMs (How many?) > > Makes sense to me. 2 is enough (4 would be good number). > > 2 Both multi-queue and single-queue > > Yes. Ideally, 1-2-4 queues. > > With different number of workers (0 workers, i.e. single VPP thread, 1 > worker, queues*2 workers). > > 3 Tests that cause the equivalent of multiple flows in OVS. Varying > variety of traffic including layer 2 and layer 3 traffic. > > Yes. Should test with L2 and L3. > > 4 Multiple IF's (Guest or Host or Both?) > > Possibly. > > But more importantly, I think, we need to have VM restart and interface > restart (delete - create). > > OpenStack integration generates a significant amount of delete-recreate of > vhost interface. > > The following might not be doable by 17.01 and if not consider the > following as a wish list for future: > > 1 vxLan tunneled traffic > > 2 VPP in guest with layer 2 and layer 3 vRouted traffic. > > 3 Additional Overlay/Underlay: MPLS > > --TFH > > -- > *Thomas F Herbert* > SDN Group > Office of Technology > *Red Hat* > > _______________________________________________ > vpp-dev mailing list > vpp-dev@lists.fd.io > https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev > > > > > > -- > *Thomas F Herbert* > SDN Group > Office of Technology > *Red Hat* > > > >
_______________________________________________ vpp-dev mailing list vpp-dev@lists.fd.io https://lists.fd.io/mailman/listinfo/vpp-dev
