From: Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@windriver.com>
To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] interrupt mitigation on iavf?
Date: Fri, 14 May 2021 17:31:25 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8dc41fcb-c4ca-e8f4-be66-5d6f08adea59@windriver.com> (raw)
Hi,
I'm using iavf 4.0.1 and i40e 2.14.13 on a CentOS 7 RT kernel. I have
traffic coming in at a total of 150K packets/sec (64-byte packets) over
two devices, each with multiple VFs. I have kernel bridging enabled
between the two VFs, and I'm seeing relatively high CPU consumption in
the "irq/XXX-iavf-ne" threads. ( I assume these are the threads
corresponding to the "iavf-netX-TxRx-X" interrupts that show up in
/proc/interrupts.)
This is in the context of a Kubernetes environment, where we're passing
through the VFs into a container via the SRIOV device plugin for Kubernetes.
By default, we were seeing one iavf interrupt per packet. Given that
"adaptive rx" and "adaptive tx" were both on, this seems wrong.
Within the container I see the VFs as "net1" and "net2", and I can use
"ethtool -C" to set the coalescing parameters. I can also see them
outside of Kubernetes if I run the ethtool command using the appropriate
network namespace. (ip netns exec <namespace> ethtool -C net1 ....)
Given the above, I have a few questions.
1) Is hardware adaptive interrupt rate limiting working on iavf? It
seemed to be ineffective as I originally got one interrupt per packet.
2) Isn't the kernel itself supposed to do interrupt rate limiting via
iavf_napi_poll()? Or is that not effective when there are eight
interrupts in play?
3) Is there any way to set the coalescing parameters on the VFs of the
original PF in the root namespace? Or do I need to operate on the linux
network device corresponding to the VF (via the alternate namespace or
from the container)?
4) Even with interrupt rates turned way down in ethtool
(rx-usecs/tx-usecs of 8000), at 150K packets per second I'm still seeing
about 3% CPU usage in each of 8 "irq/XXX-iavf-ne" threads. Doubling the
interrupt rates doesn't really change the CPU usage so I'm wondering if
this is the actual packet processing cost for the bridging?
Thanks!
Chris
reply other threads:[~2021-05-14 23:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
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=8dc41fcb-c4ca-e8f4-be66-5d6f08adea59@windriver.com \
--to=chris.friesen@windriver.com \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@osuosl.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox