netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Leon Romanovsky <leon@kernel.org>
To: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
	Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@nvidia.com>,
	"David S . Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, Raed Salem <raeds@nvidia.com>,
	ipsec-devel <devel@linux-ipsec.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH xfrm-next v2 0/6] Extend XFRM core to allow full offload configuration
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2022 11:54:42 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <YwNEUguW7aTXC2Vs@unreal> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220822084105.GI2602992@gauss3.secunet.de>

On Mon, Aug 22, 2022 at 10:41:05AM +0200, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2022 at 10:53:56AM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Fri, 19 Aug 2022 13:01:22 -0300 Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > Regardless, RDMA doesn't really intersect with this netdev work for
> > > XFRM beyond the usual ways that RDMA IP traffic can be captured by or
> > > run parallel to netdev.
> > > 
> > > A significant use case here is for switchdev modes where the switch
> > > will subject traffic from a switch port to ESP, not unlike it already
> > > does with vlan, vxlan, etc and other already fully offloaded switching
> > > transforms.
> > 
> > Yup, that's what I thought you'd say. Can't argue with that use case 
> > if Steffen is satisfied with the technical aspects.
> 
> Yes, everything that can help to overcome the performance problems
> can help and I'm interested in this type of offload. But we need to
> make sure the API is usable by the whole community, so I don't
> want an API for some special case one of the NIC vendors is
> interested in.

BTW, we have a performance data, I planned to send it as part of cover
letter for v3, but it is worth to share it now.

 ================================================================================
 Performance results:

 TCP multi-stream, using iperf3 instance per-CPU.
 +----------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+---------+---------+
 |                      | 1 CPU  | 2 CPUs | 4 CPUs | 8 CPUs | 16 CPUs | 32 CPUs |
 |                      +--------+--------+--------+--------+---------+---------+
 |                      |                   BW (Gbps)                           |
 +----------------------+--------+--------+-------+---------+---------+---------+
 | Baseline             | 27.9   | 59     | 93.1  | 92.8    | 93.7    | 94.4    |
 +----------------------+--------+--------+-------+---------+---------+---------+
 | Software IPsec       | 6      | 11.9   | 23.3  | 45.9    | 83.8    | 91.8    |
 +----------------------+--------+--------+-------+---------+---------+---------+
 | IPsec crypto offload | 15     | 29.7   | 58.5  | 89.6    | 90.4    | 90.8    |
 +----------------------+--------+--------+-------+---------+---------+---------+
 | IPsec full offload   | 28     | 57     | 90.7  | 91      | 91.3    | 91.9    |
 +----------------------+--------+--------+-------+---------+---------+---------+

 IPsec full offload mode behaves as baseline and reaches linerate with same amount
 of CPUs.

 Setups details (similar for both sides):
 * NIC: ConnectX6-DX dual port, 100 Gbps each.
   Single port used in the tests.
 * CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8380 CPU @ 2.30GHz

Thanks

  reply	other threads:[~2022-08-22  8:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 45+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-08-16  8:59 [PATCH xfrm-next v2 0/6] Extend XFRM core to allow full offload configuration Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-16  8:59 ` [PATCH xfrm-next v2 1/6] xfrm: add new full offload flag Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-16  8:59 ` [PATCH xfrm-next v2 2/6] xfrm: allow state full offload mode Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-18 10:12   ` Steffen Klassert
2022-08-18 13:28     ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-22  8:01       ` Steffen Klassert
2022-08-22  8:46         ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-16  8:59 ` [PATCH xfrm-next v2 3/6] xfrm: add an interface to offload policy Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-16  8:59 ` [PATCH xfrm-next v2 4/6] xfrm: add TX datapath support for IPsec full offload mode Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-18 10:24   ` Steffen Klassert
2022-08-18 13:34     ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-22  8:04       ` Steffen Klassert
2022-08-22  8:50         ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-16  8:59 ` [PATCH xfrm-next v2 5/6] xfrm: add RX datapath protection " Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-18 10:27   ` Steffen Klassert
2022-08-18 13:36     ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-22  8:06       ` Steffen Klassert
2022-08-22  9:35         ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-16  8:59 ` [PATCH xfrm-next v2 6/6] xfrm: enforce separation between priorities of HW/SW policies Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-17  2:54 ` [PATCH xfrm-next v2 0/6] Extend XFRM core to allow full offload configuration Jakub Kicinski
2022-08-17  5:22   ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-17 18:10     ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-08-18  5:24       ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-18 10:10         ` Steffen Klassert
2022-08-18 12:51           ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-19  1:54           ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-08-19  2:34         ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-08-19  5:52           ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-19 15:47             ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-08-19 16:01               ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-08-19 17:53                 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-08-22  8:41                   ` Steffen Klassert
2022-08-22  8:54                     ` Leon Romanovsky [this message]
2022-08-22 16:33                       ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-08-22 21:27                         ` Saeed Mahameed
2022-08-23  0:17                           ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-08-23  5:22                             ` Steffen Klassert
2022-08-23 14:06                               ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-23  4:48                           ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-26 12:20                             ` Jason Gunthorpe
2022-08-23  5:34                         ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-18 10:09 ` Steffen Klassert
2022-08-18 13:26   ` Leon Romanovsky
2022-08-22  8:34     ` Steffen Klassert
2022-08-22  9:34       ` Leon Romanovsky

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=YwNEUguW7aTXC2Vs@unreal \
    --to=leon@kernel.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=devel@linux-ipsec.org \
    --cc=herbert@gondor.apana.org.au \
    --cc=jgg@nvidia.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=raeds@nvidia.com \
    --cc=steffen.klassert@secunet.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).