From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <jbrouer@redhat.com>
Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
Tom Herbert <therbert@google.com>
Subject: Re: CPU scheduler to TXQ binding? (ixgbe vs. igb)
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 07:59:51 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <5419A1E7.8040109@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1410964359.7106.229.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
On 09/17/2014 07:32 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-09-17 at 15:26 +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
>> The CPU to TXQ binding behavior of ixgbe vs. igb NIC driver are
>> somehow different. Normally I setup NIC IRQ-to-CPU bindings 1-to-1,
>> with script set_irq_affinity [1].
>>
>> For forcing use of a specific HW TXQ, I normally force the CPU binding
>> of the process, either with "taskset" or with "netperf -T lcpu,rcpu".
>>
>> This works fine with driver ixgbe, but not with driver igb. That is
>> with igb, the program forced to specific CPU, can still use another
>> TXQ. What am I missing?
>>
>>
>> I'm monitoring this with both:
>> 1) watch -d sudo tc -s -d q ls dev ethXX
>> 2) https://github.com/ffainelli/bqlmon
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/netoptimizer/network-testing/blob/master/bin/set_irq_affinity
>
> Have you setup XPS ?
>
> echo 0001 >/sys/class/net/ethX/queues/tx-0/xps_cpus
> echo 0002 >/sys/class/net/ethX/queues/tx-1/xps_cpus
> echo 0004 >/sys/class/net/ethX/queues/tx-2/xps_cpus
> echo 0008 >/sys/class/net/ethX/queues/tx-3/xps_cpus
> echo 0010 >/sys/class/net/ethX/queues/tx-4/xps_cpus
> echo 0020 >/sys/class/net/ethX/queues/tx-5/xps_cpus
> echo 0040 >/sys/class/net/ethX/queues/tx-6/xps_cpus
> echo 0080 >/sys/class/net/ethX/queues/tx-7/xps_cpus
>
> Or something like that, depending on number of cpus and TX queues.
>
That was what I was thinking as well.
ixgbe has ATR which makes use of XPS to setup the transmit queues for a
1:1 mapping. The receive side of the flow is routed back to the same Rx
queue through flow director mappings.
In the case of igb it only has RSS and doesn't set a default XPS
configuration. So you should probably setup XPS and you might also want
to try and make use of RPS to try and steer receive packets since the Rx
queues won't match the Tx queues.
Thanks,
Alex
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-09-17 14:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-09-17 13:26 CPU scheduler to TXQ binding? (ixgbe vs. igb) Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2014-09-17 14:32 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-09-17 14:55 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2014-09-17 14:59 ` Alexander Duyck [this message]
2014-09-18 6:56 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2014-09-18 7:28 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2014-09-18 13:33 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-09-18 13:41 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-09-18 15:42 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-09-18 15:59 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2014-09-18 16:34 ` Eric Dumazet
2014-09-18 18:57 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2014-09-18 16:07 ` 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=5419A1E7.8040109@intel.com \
--to=alexander.h.duyck@intel.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=jbrouer@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=therbert@google.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).