From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.1 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4888C282C3 for ; Thu, 24 Jan 2019 21:31:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8BF21218D0 for ; Thu, 24 Jan 2019 21:31:29 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="CMjpokuM" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726216AbfAXVb2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jan 2019 16:31:28 -0500 Received: from mail-pg1-f169.google.com ([209.85.215.169]:46290 "EHLO mail-pg1-f169.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725974AbfAXVb2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Jan 2019 16:31:28 -0500 Received: by mail-pg1-f169.google.com with SMTP id w7so3222282pgp.13 for ; Thu, 24 Jan 2019 13:31:27 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZMf0mZGwdVvyDeV1k+sff5jkZvfsbb4tRat5SYV1Xdg=; b=CMjpokuMRM0bUj8+hcSZbkp+eoX8uh0noBx7NoKtdAfML9Z5b5J5rxFviaaEs9WGll +gHV1AHIbJUnl9X7X3qLtF43FGgaNbyZhH7pCz0qbnQmvhA80fJEZ6apOTjJByj9OufL 92HprhoTNdofLFxyh2mM6F9AFMwivJtFdzLqvop2XI13+uzQwvK3sHUlMRsquKJgWKWH LOY/rTRULPzaQ329I7FiTvu6siZvt1WMcvedRRPg/BUfl+smANcf/bBiJPo2EhiQ+2LY 08QBaJjkFDjB0GYymBRvCSX1VOhs2SwYZ6ceLXFVwcVQQRN2oXVwE+qFMaVqyC+RLiSu ccEw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZMf0mZGwdVvyDeV1k+sff5jkZvfsbb4tRat5SYV1Xdg=; b=dspU0ZWK9t/DvJIN6OQ6h3f4S5LMc2DC8E2C2SXD0n9kiyrmzS1hNED/sJ8Cj+VkHf t6IomtohdqunC2R3HTo6jjBlpb485u6Pb5wfY+iYCGiVjmcHsHRZiiwsaV1O4K9tDfCL k5hJvXX5zjAKCFkvnQdSfxlrvp6jAC2EVWcSPkGqnqh1NWseTjm34cSJ1x3siwTuIrO/ ZKoC9M2XIOHdusFZeEl9l7zAyCqGdkBzu9G+Pm/NvvXfRgHW3rHSO4O2wpYP+m85o4nu fcis5zgYOadmy6JmHnpHsqe/q4q1QYbYlOM0zS0KcwuPCshshz6Ou00H/hUxfVhwdJCV DObw== X-Gm-Message-State: AJcUukfVrJ7vs/r7Q6sp2ivSkCRGHZaw7vCnGIWixuvlj920pdidWT1B zho7+y296afMd8u63yca7zMEX9r0 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ALg8bN5dumdhoeFCsVsQhPggfJZXi7LdmQcBo8Wx3l2Cp5lDRP233OYRQslZry3TYzPdkN/OXCwQ7Q== X-Received: by 2002:a62:5c41:: with SMTP id q62mr8307853pfb.171.1548365486827; Thu, 24 Jan 2019 13:31:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.0.2.15] (ip68-228-73-187.oc.oc.cox.net. [68.228.73.187]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o4sm56397563pgs.12.2019.01.24.13.31.25 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 24 Jan 2019 13:31:25 -0800 (PST) Subject: Re: marvell 6190 NAT performance To: Marek Behun Cc: Andrew Lunn , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Russell King References: <20190124212640.43813222@nic.cz> From: Florian Fainelli Message-ID: Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2019 13:31:24 -0800 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.2.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190124212640.43813222@nic.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On 1/24/19 12:26 PM, Marek Behun wrote: > Hello, > > I am encountering strange performance issue when benchmarking NAT > performance on Armada 3720 with Marvell 88e6190 switch. > > Download speed (from internet, via Armada 3720 NAT, via switch to LAN > device) is ~750mbps and the CPU running on 100% (mostly in ksoftirq). > Upload speed is ~250mbps. > > When the LAN device is connected to A3720 directly (via SFP), the > speeds are both ~1000mbps. OK and that presumably uses the second Ethernet MAC on the SoC right? > > I realize that packing/unpacking packets with Marvell header for the > switch takes some time, but is such a performance drop expected? If you run perf top/record you would be able to see that pretty quickly, I would not think that processing of the Marvell DSA tag would incur such a high penalty though since the packets are already hot in D$ by the time we get to mangle them for the DSA network devices. How about pure (non-NAT) IP routing? How about just bridging between WAN and LAN? > > This was tested with 5.0.0-rc2 and also 4.14. > > Thank you. > > Marek > -- Florian