From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Ahern Subject: Re: Kernel 4.19 network performance - forwarding/routing normal users traffic Date: Wed, 7 Nov 2018 14:06:06 -0700 Message-ID: <6ed1666d-47bc-24e7-d432-a0c0027452ed@gmail.com> References: <61697e49-e839-befc-8330-fc00187c48ee@itcare.pl> <3a88bb53-9d17-3e85-638e-a605f5bfe0fb@gmail.com> <20181101115522.10b0dd0a@redhat.com> <63198d68-6752-3695-f406-d86fb395c12b@itcare.pl> <7141e1e0-93e4-ab20-bce6-17f1e14682f1@gmail.com> <394a0bf2-fa97-1085-2eda-98ddf476895c@itcare.pl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Cc: netdev , Yoel Caspersen To: =?UTF-8?Q?Pawe=c5=82_Staszewski?= , Jesper Dangaard Brouer Return-path: Received: from mail-pf1-f195.google.com ([209.85.210.195]:34548 "EHLO mail-pf1-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726480AbeKHGiS (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Nov 2018 01:38:18 -0500 Received: by mail-pf1-f195.google.com with SMTP id y18-v6so5841342pfn.1 for ; Wed, 07 Nov 2018 13:06:09 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <394a0bf2-fa97-1085-2eda-98ddf476895c@itcare.pl> Content-Language: en-US Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 11/3/18 6:24 PM, Paweł Staszewski wrote: >> Does your setup have any other device types besides physical ports with >> VLANs (e.g., any macvlans or bonds)? >> >> > no. > just > phy(mlnx)->vlans only config VLAN and non-VLAN (and a mix) seem to work ok. Patches are here: https://github.com/dsahern/linux.git bpf/kernel-tables-wip I got lazy with the vlan exports; right now it requires 8021q to be builtin (CONFIG_VLAN_8021Q=y) You can use the xdp_fwd sample: make O=kbuild -C samples/bpf -j 8 Copy samples/bpf/xdp_fwd_kern.o and samples/bpf/xdp_fwd to the server and run: ./xdp_fwd e.g., in my testing I run: xdp_fwd eth1 eth2 eth3 eth4 All of the relevant forwarding ports need to be on the same command line. This version populates a second map to verify the egress port has XDP enabled. > > And today again after allpy patch for page allocator - reached again > 64/64 Gbit/s > > with only 50-60% cpu load you should see the cpu load drop considerably.