From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: "Kok, Auke" <auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com>
Cc: vgusev@openvz.org, e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
rjw@sisk.pl, mcmanus@ducksong.com, ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi,
kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
xemul@openvz.org
Subject: Re: [TCP]: TCP_DEFER_ACCEPT causes leak sockets
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 23:32:30 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20080618213230.GA17821@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20080618200805.GA18756@elte.hu>
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> wrote:
> * Kok, Auke <auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com> wrote:
>
> > > Any ideas about what i should try next?
> >
> > have you tried e1000e?
>
> will try it.
ok, i tried it now, and there's good news: the latency problem seems
largely fixed by e1000e. (yay!)
with e1000 i got these anomalous latencies:
64 bytes from europe (10.0.1.15): icmp_seq=10 ttl=64 time=1000 ms
64 bytes from europe (10.0.1.15): icmp_seq=11 ttl=64 time=0.882 ms
64 bytes from europe (10.0.1.15): icmp_seq=12 ttl=64 time=1007 ms
64 bytes from europe (10.0.1.15): icmp_seq=13 ttl=64 time=0.522 ms
64 bytes from europe (10.0.1.15): icmp_seq=14 ttl=64 time=1003 ms
64 bytes from europe (10.0.1.15): icmp_seq=15 ttl=64 time=0.381 ms
64 bytes from europe (10.0.1.15): icmp_seq=16 ttl=64 time=1010 ms
with e1000e i get:
64 bytes from europe (10.0.1.15): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.212 ms
64 bytes from europe (10.0.1.15): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.372 ms
64 bytes from europe (10.0.1.15): icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.815 ms
64 bytes from europe (10.0.1.15): icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.961 ms
64 bytes from europe (10.0.1.15): icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.201 ms
64 bytes from europe (10.0.1.15): icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=0.788 ms
TCP latencies are fine too - ssh feels snappy again.
it still does not have nearly as good latencies as say forcedeth though:
64 bytes from mercury (10.0.1.13): icmp_seq=1 ttl=64 time=0.076 ms
64 bytes from mercury (10.0.1.13): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.085 ms
64 bytes from mercury (10.0.1.13): icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.045 ms
64 bytes from mercury (10.0.1.13): icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.053 ms
that's 10 times better packet latencies.
and even an ancient Realtek RTL-8139 over 10 megabit Ethernet (!) has
better latencies than the e1000e over 1000 megabit:
64 bytes from pluto (10.0.1.10): icmp_seq=2 ttl=64 time=0.309 ms
64 bytes from pluto (10.0.1.10): icmp_seq=3 ttl=64 time=0.333 ms
64 bytes from pluto (10.0.1.10): icmp_seq=4 ttl=64 time=0.329 ms
64 bytes from pluto (10.0.1.10): icmp_seq=5 ttl=64 time=0.311 ms
64 bytes from pluto (10.0.1.10): icmp_seq=6 ttl=64 time=0.302 ms
is it done intentionally perhaps? I dont think it makes much sense to
delay rx/tx processing on a completely idle box for such a long time.
The options i used are:
CONFIG_E1000=y
CONFIG_E1000_NAPI=y
# CONFIG_E1000_DISABLE_PACKET_SPLIT is not set
CONFIG_E1000E=y
CONFIG_E1000E_ENABLED=y
> But even it if solves the problem it's a nasty complication: given how
> many times i have to bisect back into the times when there was only
> e1000 around, how do i handle the transition? I have automated
> bisection tools, etc. and i bisect very frequently.
one possibility would be to change 'make oldconfig' to keep old options
around - as long as they look "unknown" to a particular kernel. It would
list them in some special "unknown options" section near the end of the
.config or so. That way the E1000E=y setting could survive a bisection
run which dives down into older kernel versions. (obviously old kernels
wont grow this capability magically, so if we do such a change we'll
have to wait years for it all to trickle through.)
and eventually E1000E could become the default.
Ingo
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://sourceforge.net/services/buy/index.php
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-06-18 21:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-06-11 12:58 [TCP]: TCP_DEFER_ACCEPT causes leak sockets Vitaliy Gusev
2008-06-11 13:57 ` Alexey Kuznetsov
2008-06-11 23:52 ` David Miller
2008-06-12 23:32 ` David Miller
2008-06-13 6:30 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-13 9:32 ` David Miller
2008-06-13 11:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-13 11:47 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-13 21:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-16 23:59 ` David Miller
2008-06-17 7:26 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-17 7:38 ` David Miller
2008-06-17 8:09 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-17 8:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-17 9:08 ` David Miller
2008-06-17 9:27 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-17 9:29 ` David Miller
2008-06-17 9:39 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-18 18:50 ` [E1000-devel] " Kok, Auke
2008-06-18 20:08 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-18 21:25 ` [E1000-devel] " Kok, Auke
2008-06-18 22:12 ` David Miller
2008-06-19 7:06 ` Jarek Poplawski
2008-06-18 21:32 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2008-06-18 21:41 ` Denys Fedoryshchenko
2008-06-18 22:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-18 22:44 ` Denys Fedoryshchenko
2008-06-18 23:14 ` Ingo Molnar
2008-06-17 8:43 ` Vitaliy Gusev
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=20080618213230.GA17821@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=e1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi \
--cc=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mcmanus@ducksong.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rjw@sisk.pl \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
--cc=vgusev@openvz.org \
--cc=xemul@openvz.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).