From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
To: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hp.com>
Cc: Netfilter Developers <netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org>,
Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>,
Linux Network Development list <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>
Subject: Re: 32 core net-next stack/netfilter "scaling"
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 23:17:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <497F87E7.2000304@cosmosbay.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <497F5F86.9010101@hp.com>
Rick Jones a écrit :
>>> I will give it a try and let folks know the results - unless told
>>> otherwise, I will ass-u-me I only need rerun the "full_iptables"
>>> test case.
>>
>>
>> The runemomniagg2.sh script is still running, but the initial cycles
>> profile suggests that the main change is converting the write_lock
>> time into spinlock contention time with 78.39% of the cycles spent in
>> ia64_spinlock_contention. When the script completes I'll upload the
>> profiles and the netperf results to the same base URL as in the
>> basenote under "contrack01/"
>
> The script completed - although at some point I hit an fd limit - I
> think I have an fd leak in netperf somewhere :( .
>
> Anyhow, there are still some netperfs that end-up kicking the bucket
> during the run - I suspect starvation because where in the other
> configs (no iptables, and empty iptables) each netperf seems to
> consume about 50% of a CPU - stands to reason - 64 netperfs, 32 cores
> - in the "full" case I see many netperfs consuming 100% of a CPU. My
> gut is thinking that one or more netperf contexts gets stuck doing
> something on behalf of others. There is also ksoftirqd time for a few
> of those processes.
>
> Anyhow, the spread on trans/s/netperf is now 600 to 500 or 6000, which
> does represent an improvement.
>
> rick jones
>
> PS - just to be certain that running-out of fd's didn't skew the
> results I'm rerunning the script with ulimit -n 10240 and will see if
> that changes the results any. And I suppose I need to go fd leak
> hunting in netperf omni code :(
> --
>
Thanks for the report
If you have so much contention on spinlocks, maybe hash function is not
good at all...
hash = (unsigned long)ct;
hash ^= hash >> 16;
hash ^= hash >> 8;
I ass-u-me you compiled your kernel with NR_CPUS=32 ?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-27 22:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-26 22:15 32 core net-next stack/netfilter "scaling" Rick Jones
2009-01-26 23:10 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-26 23:14 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-01-26 23:19 ` Rick Jones
2009-01-27 9:10 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-27 9:15 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-01-27 11:29 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-27 11:37 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-01-27 16:23 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-27 17:33 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-01-27 18:02 ` Rick Jones
2009-01-27 19:09 ` Rick Jones
2009-01-27 19:24 ` Rick Jones
2009-01-27 22:17 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2009-01-27 22:29 ` Rick Jones
2009-01-27 22:34 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-27 22:43 ` Rick Jones
2009-01-28 13:55 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-28 16:25 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-01-28 17:07 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-28 17:34 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-29 15:31 ` [PATCH] netfilter: unfold two critical loops in ip_packet_match() Eric Dumazet
2009-01-30 15:47 ` Andi Kleen
2009-01-30 16:54 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-30 17:27 ` Andi Kleen
2009-01-30 17:27 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-30 17:50 ` Andi Kleen
2009-02-09 13:41 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 15:10 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-18 15:21 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 16:33 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-02-18 16:52 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-18 17:36 ` [PATCH] netfilter: xt_physdev fixes Eric Dumazet
2009-02-18 18:14 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-19 8:00 ` [PATCH] netfilter: unfold two loops in physdev_mt() Eric Dumazet
2009-02-19 8:14 ` [PATCH] netfilter: unfold two loops in ip6_packet_match() Eric Dumazet
2009-02-19 10:19 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-19 10:17 ` [PATCH] netfilter: unfold two loops in physdev_mt() Patrick McHardy
2009-02-20 10:02 ` [PATCH] netfilter: unfold two critical loops in ip_packet_match() Eric Dumazet
2009-02-20 10:04 ` Patrick McHardy
2009-02-09 14:57 ` 32 core net-next stack/netfilter "scaling" Patrick McHardy
2009-02-10 18:44 ` Stephen Hemminger
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=497F87E7.2000304@cosmosbay.com \
--to=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=rick.jones2@hp.com \
--cc=shemminger@vyatta.com \
/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).