From: Juliana Rodrigueiro <juliana.rodrigueiro@intra2net.com>
To: "Heiner Kallweit" <hkallweit1@gmail.com>,
"Holger Hoffstätte" <holger@applied-asynchrony.com>,
"Eric Dumazet" <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: r8169: Performance regression and latency instability
Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2019 18:04:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a757135b-ec79-0ad5-5886-2989330424ee@intra2net.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <8fa71d82-d309-df38-5924-2275db188b61@gmail.com>
Hi!
First of all: Thank you everyone for the input.
Here is some more info about my NIC. (Using the latest ethtool)
# ethtool -i eth0 ; ifconfig eth0
driver: r8169
version:
firmware-version: rtl8168h-2_0.0.2 02/26/15
expansion-rom-version:
bus-info: 0000:02:00.0
supports-statistics: yes
supports-test: no
supports-eeprom-access: no
supports-register-dump: yes
supports-priv-flags: no
eth0 Link encap:Ethernet HWaddr <hidden>
inet addr:<hidden> Bcast:<hidden> Mask:255.255.0.0
UP BROADCAST RUNNING MULTICAST MTU:1500 Metric:1
RX packets:27392501 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
TX packets:24647212 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
collisions:0 txqueuelen:1000
RX bytes:33702173568 (31.3 GiB) TX bytes:35865124147 (33.4 GiB)
On 8/16/19 9:12 PM, Heiner Kallweit wrote:
> Indeed, here we're talking about changes in linux-next, and Juliana's issue is
> with 4.19. However I'd appreciate if Juliana could test with linux-next and
> different combinations of the NETIF_F_xxx features.
I also tested the latest linux-next (20190819) and the results did not
improved for me, unfortunately. About the same as all the kernel
versions I tested from 4.17 onwards.
# netperf -v 2 -P 0 -H <netserver-ip>,4 -I 99,5 -t omni -l 1 -- -O
STDDEV_LATENCY -m 64K -d Send
627.99
Running linux-next I have the following defaults (shortened for simplicity):
# ethtool -k eth0
Features for eth0:
rx-checksumming: on
tx-checksumming: on
tx-checksum-ipv4: on
tx-checksum-ip-generic: off [fixed]
tx-checksum-ipv6: on
tx-checksum-fcoe-crc: off [fixed]
tx-checksum-sctp: off [fixed]
scatter-gather: on
tx-scatter-gather: on
tx-scatter-gather-fraglist: off [fixed]
tcp-segmentation-offload: on
tx-tcp-segmentation: on
tx-tcp-ecn-segmentation: off [fixed]
tx-tcp-mangleid-segmentation: off
tx-tcp6-segmentation: on
generic-segmentation-offload: on
generic-receive-offload: on
large-receive-offload: off [fixed]
rx-vlan-offload: on
tx-vlan-offload: on
... (all off from here)
There are quite a few possible combinations to go through. I executed my
test with SG, TSO, GSO, RX, TX individually disabled, but the results
were all the same or slightly worse.
Until I find the root cause, we will have to keep the "tcp: switch to
GSO being always on" patch reverted for production, which is not ideal.
Any other ideas how I could debug this issue?
Best regards,
Juliana.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-08-19 16:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-08-16 12:09 r8169: Performance regression and latency instability Juliana Rodrigueiro
2019-08-16 12:35 ` Eric Dumazet
2019-08-16 13:59 ` Holger Hoffstätte
2019-08-16 19:12 ` Heiner Kallweit
2019-08-19 16:04 ` Juliana Rodrigueiro [this message]
2019-09-06 11:25 ` Juliana Rodrigueiro
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=a757135b-ec79-0ad5-5886-2989330424ee@intra2net.com \
--to=juliana.rodrigueiro@intra2net.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=hkallweit1@gmail.com \
--cc=holger@applied-asynchrony.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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