From: Wes Chow <wchow@athenacr.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Multicast packet loss
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 16:09:33 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4987610D.6040902@athenacr.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <498757AA.8010101@cosmosbay.com>
Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Wes Chow a écrit :
>> (I'm Kenny's colleague, and I've been doing the kernel builds)
>>
>> First I'd like to note that there were a lot of bnx2 NAPI changes between
>> 2.6.21 and 2.6.22. As a reminder, 2.6.21 shows tiny amounts of packet loss,
>> whereas loss in 2.6.22 is significant.
>>
>> Second, some CPU affinity info: if I do like Eric and pin all of the
>> apps onto a single CPU, I see no packet loss. Also, I do *not* see
>> ksoftirqd show up on top at all!
>>
>> If I pin half the processes on one CPU and the other half on another CPU, one
>> ksoftirqd processes shows up in top and completely pegs one CPU. My packet loss
>> in that case is significant (25%).
>>
>> Now, the strange case: if I pin 3 processes to one CPU and 1 process to
>> another, I get about 25% packet loss and ksoftirqd pins one CPU. However, one
>> of the apps takes significantly less CPU than the others, and all apps lose the
>> *exact same number of packets*. In all other situations where we see packet
>> loss, the actual number lost per application instance appears random.
>
> You see same number of packet lost because they are lost at NIC level
Understood.
I have a new observation: if I pin processes to just CPUs 0 and 1, I see
no packet loss. Pinning to 0 and 2, I do see packet loss. Pinning 2 and
3, no packet loss. 4 & 5 - no packet loss, 6 & 7 - no packet loss. Any
other combination appears to produce loss (though I have not tried all
28 combinations, this seems to be the case).
At first I thought maybe it had to do with processes pinned to the same
CPU, but different cores. The machine is a dual quad core, which means
that CPUs 0-3 should be a physical CPU, correct? Pinning to 0/2 and 0/3
produce packet loss.
I've also noticed that it does not matter which of the working pairs I
pin to. For example, pinning 5 processes in any combination on either
0/1 produce no packet loss, pinning all 5 to just CPU 0 also produces no
packet loss.
The failures are also sudden. In all of the working cases mentioned
above, I don't see ksoftirqd on top at all. But when I run 6 processes
on a single CPU, ksoftirqd shoots up to 100% and I lose a huge number of
packets.
>
> Normaly, softirq runs on same cpu (the one handling hard irq)
What determines which CPU the hard irq occurs on?
Wes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-02-02 21:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 70+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-30 17:49 Multicast packet loss Kenny Chang
2009-01-30 19:04 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-30 19:17 ` Denys Fedoryschenko
2009-01-30 20:03 ` Neil Horman
2009-01-30 22:29 ` Kenny Chang
2009-01-30 22:41 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-31 16:03 ` Neil Horman
2009-02-02 16:13 ` Kenny Chang
2009-02-02 16:48 ` Kenny Chang
2009-02-03 11:55 ` Neil Horman
2009-02-03 15:20 ` Kenny Chang
2009-02-04 1:15 ` Neil Horman
2009-02-04 16:07 ` Kenny Chang
2009-02-04 16:46 ` Wesley Chow
2009-02-04 18:11 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-05 13:33 ` Neil Horman
2009-02-05 13:46 ` Wesley Chow
2009-02-05 13:29 ` Neil Horman
2009-02-01 12:40 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-02 13:45 ` Neil Horman
2009-02-02 16:57 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-02 18:22 ` Neil Horman
2009-02-02 19:51 ` Wes Chow
2009-02-02 20:29 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-02 21:09 ` Wes Chow [this message]
2009-02-02 21:31 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-03 17:34 ` Kenny Chang
2009-02-04 1:21 ` Neil Horman
2009-02-26 17:15 ` Kenny Chang
2009-02-28 8:51 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-01 17:03 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-04 8:16 ` David Miller
2009-03-04 8:36 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-07 7:46 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-08 16:46 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-09 2:49 ` David Miller
2009-03-09 6:36 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-13 21:51 ` David Miller
2009-03-13 22:30 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-13 22:38 ` David Miller
2009-03-13 22:45 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-14 9:03 ` [PATCH] net: reorder fields of struct socket Eric Dumazet
2009-03-16 2:59 ` David Miller
2009-03-16 22:22 ` Multicast packet loss Eric Dumazet
2009-03-17 10:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-17 11:08 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-17 11:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-03-17 15:00 ` Brian Bloniarz
2009-03-17 15:16 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-17 19:39 ` David Stevens
2009-03-17 21:19 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-04-03 19:28 ` Brian Bloniarz
2009-04-05 13:49 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-04-06 21:53 ` Brian Bloniarz
2009-04-06 22:12 ` Brian Bloniarz
2009-04-07 20:08 ` Brian Bloniarz
2009-04-08 8:12 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-09 22:56 ` Brian Bloniarz
2009-03-10 5:28 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-10 23:22 ` Brian Bloniarz
2009-03-11 3:00 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-12 15:47 ` Brian Bloniarz
2009-03-12 16:34 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-27 18:40 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-02-27 18:56 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-27 19:45 ` Christoph Lameter
2009-02-27 20:12 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-27 21:36 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-02 13:53 ` Eric Dumazet
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-04-05 14:42 bmb
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4987610D.6040902@athenacr.com \
--to=wchow@athenacr.com \
--cc=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.