From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com>
To: jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
"Skidmore, Donald C" <donald.c.skidmore@intel.com>,
Greg Rose <gregory.v.rose@intel.com>,
John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@intel.com>,
Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [BUG] ixgbe: something wrong with queue selection ?
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2012 09:01:37 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F8D93E1.9090000@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1334654187.2696.2.camel@jtkirshe-mobl>
On 04/17/2012 02:16 AM, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-04-17 at 11:06 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> Hi guys
>>
>> I have bad feelings with ixgbe and its multiqueue selection.
>>
>> On a quad core machine (Q6600), I get lots of reorderings on a single
>> TCP stream.
>>
>>
>> Apparently packets happily spread on all available queues, instead of a
>> single one.
>>
>> This defeats GRO at receiver and TCP performance is really bad.
>>
>> # ethtool -S eth5|egrep "x_queue_[0123]_packets" ; taskset 1 netperf -H
>> 192.168.99.1 ; ethtool -S eth5|egrep "x_queue_[0123]_packets"
>> tx_queue_0_packets: 24
>> tx_queue_1_packets: 26
>> tx_queue_2_packets: 32
>> tx_queue_3_packets: 16
>> rx_queue_0_packets: 11
>> rx_queue_1_packets: 47
>> rx_queue_2_packets: 27
>> rx_queue_3_packets: 22
>> MIGRATED TCP STREAM TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to
>> 192.168.99.1 (192.168.99.1) port 0 AF_INET
>> Recv Send Send
>> Socket Socket Message Elapsed
>> Size Size Size Time Throughput
>> bytes bytes bytes secs. 10^6bits/sec
>>
>> 87380 16384 16384 10.00 3866.43
>> tx_queue_0_packets: 1653201
>> tx_queue_1_packets: 608000
>> tx_queue_2_packets: 541382
>> tx_queue_3_packets: 536543
>> rx_queue_0_packets: 434703
>> rx_queue_1_packets: 137444
>> rx_queue_2_packets: 131023
>> rx_queue_3_packets: 128407
>>
>> # ip ro get 192.168.99.1
>> 192.168.99.1 dev eth5 src 192.168.99.2
>> cache ipid 0x438b rtt 4ms rttvar 4ms cwnd 57 reordering 127
>>
>> # lspci -v -s 02:00.0
>> 02:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82599EB 10-Gigabit
>> SFI/SFP+ Network Connection (rev 01)
>> Subsystem: Intel Corporation Ethernet Server Adapter X520-2
>> Flags: bus master, fast devsel, latency 0, IRQ 16
>> Memory at f1100000 (64-bit, prefetchable) [size=512K]
>> I/O ports at b000 [size=32]
>> Memory at f1200000 (64-bit, prefetchable) [size=16K]
>> Capabilities: [40] Power Management version 3
>> Capabilities: [50] MSI: Enable- Count=1/1 Maskable+ 64bit+
>> Capabilities: [70] MSI-X: Enable+ Count=64 Masked-
>> Capabilities: [a0] Express Endpoint, MSI 00
>> Capabilities: [100] Advanced Error Reporting
>> Capabilities: [140] Device Serial Number 00-1b-21-ff-ff-4a-fe-54
>> Capabilities: [150] Alternative Routing-ID Interpretation (ARI)
>> Capabilities: [160] Single Root I/O Virtualization (SR-IOV)
>> Kernel driver in use: ixgbe
>> Kernel modules: ixgbe
>>
>>
> Adding Don Skidmore and Alex Duyck...
This is probably the result of ATR and the load balancer on the system.
What is likely happening is that the netperf process is getting moved
from CPU to CPU, and this is causing the transmit queue to change. Once
this happens the ATR will cause the receive queue to change in order to
follow the transmitting process.
One thing you might try is using the "-T" option in netperf to see if
the behaviour occurs if the process is bound to a specific CPU. Another
thing you might try would be to disable ATR by enabling ntuple. You
should be able to do that with "ethtool -K eth5 ntuple on".
Thanks,
Alex
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-04-17 16:01 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-17 9:06 [BUG] ixgbe: something wrong with queue selection ? Eric Dumazet
2012-04-17 9:16 ` Jeff Kirsher
2012-04-17 16:01 ` Alexander Duyck [this message]
2012-04-17 16:38 ` John Fastabend
2012-04-17 17:07 ` Ben Hutchings
2012-04-17 16:46 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-04-17 21:38 ` TSO not 10G friendly if peer is close enough Eric Dumazet
2012-04-17 21:47 ` David Miller
2012-04-18 3:00 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-04-18 15:49 ` [PATCH net-next] tcp: avoid expensive pskb_expand_head() calls Eric Dumazet
[not found] ` <4F8EF317.10504@hp.com>
2012-04-18 17:16 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-04-18 17:30 ` Rick Jones
2012-04-18 17:40 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-04-18 18:40 ` Neal Cardwell
2012-04-18 19:18 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-04-18 19:51 ` [PATCH v2 " Eric Dumazet
2012-04-19 11:10 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2012-04-19 11:30 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-04-19 11:40 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-04-19 11:57 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2012-04-19 12:44 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-04-20 12:27 ` Ilpo Järvinen
2012-04-19 13:18 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-04-19 13:52 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-04-19 14:10 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-04-19 17:20 ` Rick Jones
2012-04-19 17:25 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-04-19 17:48 ` Rick Jones
2012-04-19 18:00 ` Eric Dumazet
2012-04-19 18:05 ` Rick Jones
2012-04-18 19:41 ` [PATCH " Vijay Subramanian
2012-04-18 19:49 ` Eric Dumazet
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=4F8D93E1.9090000@intel.com \
--to=alexander.h.duyck@intel.com \
--cc=donald.c.skidmore@intel.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=gregory.v.rose@intel.com \
--cc=jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com \
--cc=jesse.brandeburg@intel.com \
--cc=john.r.fastabend@intel.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.