From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Tue Feb 28 20:07:24 2017 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A2789CF2716 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 20:07:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from meyer.sydney@googlemail.com) Received: from mail-wr0-x22c.google.com (mail-wr0-x22c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c0c::22c]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F633AE1 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 20:07:24 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from meyer.sydney@googlemail.com) Received: by mail-wr0-x22c.google.com with SMTP id u108so16265567wrb.3 for ; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 12:07:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20161025; h=from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:references :to:in-reply-to:message-id; bh=AjGsNzQptjSqZy7H/9XENLu3R8BTvuYWxLaNsX9+cZY=; b=CJBCtNWkHwXM78KCg30zIx9CbfloEQbDiEL6R4zwG2E8/C0VVUojv9K6gybAgu+kq5 bxjASUzzpyhXw5GAMKGJLuTVtsAC74Ul4QWJB9w9l2h6vOfx1GhN0gS5dTXPU0ezottV fLuG3jGBNCL84dNe/HP64/CbF+IGIYGXHLZM8DtIrTzHvKvyts5GxiQbWEs5CWHW97dY PQAM44gvqdKG18x92U6pFduutS2K9usBvSFojJzH+nv/1vmO4kCZqLx27BrLdgmi/x5g fZ574aVNz/JZlzemsw0FgLcNRtdIdMOw8SeRZNPuSDEitXfA6tKCnR0Gdh+z5EmXTLwE 9mVw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :subject:date:references:to:in-reply-to:message-id; bh=AjGsNzQptjSqZy7H/9XENLu3R8BTvuYWxLaNsX9+cZY=; b=eRdjmCsQVS4Qdlm4b374YHxFdUs5sIGVnZfvNt+FDdRqmDdmhcyRhwNlh2tFj+xiCf qFBVf5XCineyj4ao7790ttpHvoYO8lv/Oj6Ihy15eEZGnT4SMNs51LfSM9HJcdknjJ7Z WgA7pktXDs2mHB0pAhAMaWYB/sAGvrUmR818GUslE3Llg393htI1mSpAUNpgo5p/Xe7c ZSA/xqLzkVAGLwqFhyKCPC1zFqvuZUEvX2AdvzJKXT+728X9GRGZ6eBRcbkS2oi0eOCm 7FuJxKfwq+qd/skcNtD1UsDWEsWtHfbPjj71YmXuO9hg1TkUYSaBPmm8ZxPvvtf3LdZR /W7Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mAgNdxkSudsKu8UPsTLnq2e+K7f0ftxT1vlMvORFwYMLTtkujVEJlBrLXYv6aoRQ== X-Received: by 10.223.176.143 with SMTP id i15mr4084145wra.136.1488312438893; Tue, 28 Feb 2017 12:07:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.13.0.1] (62.93-64-87.adsl-dyn.isp.belgacom.be. [87.64.93.62]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id k76sm3065181wrc.12.2017.02.28.12.07.16 for (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 28 Feb 2017 12:07:17 -0800 (PST) From: Sydney Meyer Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\)) Subject: Re: Disappointing packets-per-second performance results on a Dell, PE R530 Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 21:07:15 +0100 References: <40a413f3-2c44-ee9d-9961-67114d8dffca@gmail.com> <20170205175531.GA20287@dwarf> <7d349edd-0c81-2e3f-d3b9-27af232de76d@gmail.com> <20170209153409.GG41673@dwarf> <6ad029e0-86c6-af3d-8fc3-694d4bcdc683@gmail.com> <7546B456-94A9-4603-A07F-4E0AB0285E1A@gmail.com> To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org In-Reply-To: <7546B456-94A9-4603-A07F-4E0AB0285E1A@gmail.com> Message-Id: <81FD8C20-B6AA-42A0-899A-62D4DA4A11DC@googlemail.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259) X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2017 20:07:24 -0000 Hello, perhaps you've already gone through these, but this site summarizes also = a few important tweaks, e.g. disabling entropy harvest, etc.. Also, there are detailed and well documented benchmarks about FreeBSD = Routing Performance, IIRC, also with Chelsio Cards.. https://bsdrp.net/documentation/technical_docs/performance Sydney > On 28 Feb 2017, at 07:35, Ben RUBSON wrote: >=20 > Hi, >=20 > Try disabling NUMA in your BIOS settings ? > I had perf issue on a 2-CPU (24 cores) server, I was not able to run a = 40G NIC at its max throughput. > We investigated a lot, disabling NUMA in the BIOS was the solution, as = NUMA is not fully supported yet (as of stable/11). >=20 > Ben >=20 >=20 >=20 >> On 28 Feb 2017, at 03:13, Caraballo-vega, Jordan A. = (GSFC-6062)[COMPUTER SCIENCE CORP] wrote: >>=20 >> As a summarywe have a Dell R530 with a Chelsio T580 cardwith = -CURRENT. >>=20 >> In an attempt to reduce the time the system was taking to look for = the >> cpus; we changed the BIOS setting to let the system have 8 visible = cores >> and tested cxl* and vcxl* chelsio interfaces. Scores are still way = lower >> than what we expected: >>=20 >> Cxl interface >>=20 >> root@router1:~ # netstat -w1 -h >> input (Total) output >> packets errs idrops bytes packets errs bytes colls >> 4.1M 0 3.4M 2.1G 725k 0 383M 0 >> 3.7M 0 3.1M 1.9G 636k 0 336M 0 >> 3.9M 0 3.2M 2.0G 684k 0 362M 0 >> 4.0M 0 3.3M 2.1G 702k 0 371M 0 >> 3.8M 0 3.2M 2.0G 658k 0 348M 0 >> 3.9M 0 3.2M 2.0G 658k 0 348M 0 >> 3.9M 0 3.2M 2.0G 721k 0 381M 0 >> 3.3M 0 2.6M 1.7G 681k 0 360M 0 >> 3.2M 0 2.5M 1.7G 666k 0 352M 0 >> 2.6M 0 2.0M 1.4G 620k 0 328M 0 >> 2.8M 0 2.1M 1.4G 615k 0 325M 0 >> 3.2M 0 2.6M 1.7G 612k 0 323M 0 >> 3.3M 0 2.7M 1.7G 664k 0 351M 0 >>=20 >>=20 >> Vcxl interface >> input (Total) output >> packets errs idrops bytes packets errs bytes colls = drops >> 590k 7.5k 0 314M 590k 0 314M 0 = 0 >> 526k 6.6k 0 280M 526k 0 280M 0 = 0 >> 588k 7.1k 0 313M 588k 0 313M 0 = 0 >> 532k 6.6k 0 283M 532k 0 283M 0 = 0 >> 578k 7.2k 0 307M 578k 0 307M 0 = 0 >> 565k 7.0k 0 300M 565k 0 300M 0 = 0 >> 558k 7.0k 0 297M 558k 0 297M 0 = 0 >> 533k 6.7k 0 284M 533k 0 284M 0 = 0 >> 588k 7.3k 0 313M 588k 0 313M 0 = 0 >> 553k 6.9k 0 295M 554k 0 295M 0 = 0 >> 527k 6.7k 0 281M 527k 0 281M 0 = 0 >> 585k 7.4k 0 311M 585k 0 311M 0 = 0 >>=20 >> Related to pmcstat scores are: >>=20 >> root@router1:~/PMC_Stats/Feb22 # pmcstat -R sample.out -G - | head >> @ CPU_CLK_UNHALTED_CORE [2091 samples] >>=20 >> 15.35% [321] lock_delay @ /boot/kernel/kernel >> 94.70% [304] _mtx_lock_spin_cookie >> 100.0% [304] __mtx_lock_spin_flags >> 57.89% [176] pmclog_loop @ /boot/kernel/hwpmc.ko >> 100.0% [176] fork_exit @ /boot/kernel/kernel >> 41.12% [125] pmclog_reserve @ /boot/kernel/hwpmc.ko >> 100.0% [125] pmclog_process_callchain >> 100.0% [125] pmc_process_samples >>=20 >> root@router1:~/PMC_Stats/Feb22 # pmcstat -R sample0.out -G - | head >> @ CPU_CLK_UNHALTED_CORE [480 samples] >>=20 >> 37.29% [179] acpi_cpu_idle_mwait @ /boot/kernel/kernel >> 100.0% [179] acpi_cpu_idle >> 100.0% [179] cpu_idle_acpi >> 100.0% [179] cpu_idle >> 100.0% [179] sched_idletd >> 100.0% [179] fork_exit >>=20 >> 12.92% [62] cpu_idle @ /boot/kernel/kernel >>=20 >> When trying to run pmcstat with the vcxl interfaces enabled the = system >> just went to a state of not responding. >>=20 >> Based on previous scores with Centos 7 (over 3M pps), we can assume = that >> it is not the hardware. However, we are still looking for a reason of >> why are we getting these scores. >>=20 >> Any feedback or suggestion would be highly appreciated. >>=20 >> - Jordan >>=20 >> On 2/9/17 11:34 AM, Navdeep Parhar wrote: >>> The vcxl interfaces should work under current or 11-STABLE. Let me = know >>> if you run into any trouble when trying to use netmap with cxgbe = driver. >>>=20 >>> Regards, >>> Navdeep >>>=20 >>> On Thu, Feb 09, 2017 at 10:29:08AM -0500, John Jasen wrote: >>>> It's not the hardware. >>>>=20 >>>> Jordan booted up CentOS on the box, and untuned, were able to = obtain >>>> over 3 mpps. >>>>=20 >>>> He has some pmcstat output from freebsd-current, but basically, it >>>> appears the system spends most of its time looking for a CPU to = service >>>> the interrupts and keeps landing on one or two of them, as opposed = to >>>> any of the other 16 cores on the physical silicon. >>>>=20 >>>> We also tried swapping out the T5 card for a Mellanox, tried = different >>>> PCIe slots, adjusted cpuset for the low and the high CPUs, no = matter >>>> what we try, the results have been bad. >>>>=20 >>>> Our network test environment is under reconstruction at the moment, = but >>>> our plans afterwards are to: >>>>=20 >>>> a) test netmap-fwd again (the VCXL enabling works under -CURRENT?) >>>>=20 >>>> b) test without netmap-fwd, and with reduced cores/physical cpus = (BIOS >>>> setting) >>>>=20 >>>> c) potentially, test with netmap-fwd and reduced core count. >>>>=20 >>>> Any other ideas out there? >>>>=20 >>>> Thanks! >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>>=20 >>>> On 02/05/2017 12:55 PM, Navdeep Parhar wrote: >>>>> I've been following the email thread on freebsd-net on this. The >>>>> numbers you're getting are well below what the hardware is capable = of. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Have you tried netmap-fwd or something that bypasses the kernel? = That >>>>> will be a very quick way to make sure that the hardware is doing = ok. >>>>>=20 >>>>> In case you try netmap: >>>>> cxgbe has virtual interfaces now and those are used for netmap = (instead >>>>> of the main interface). Add this line to /boot/loader.conf and = you'll >>>>> see a 'vcxl' interface for every cxl interface. >>>>> hw.cxgbe.num_vis=3D2 >>>>> It has its own MAC address and can be used like any other = interface, >>>>> except it has native netmap support too. You can run netmap-fwd = between >>>>> these vcxl ports. >>>>>=20 >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Navdeep >>>>>=20 >>>>> On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 01:57:37PM -0400, Jordan Caraballo wrote: >>>>>> Navdeep, Troy, >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> I forwarded you this email to see if we could get feedback from = both of >>>>>> you. I talked with Troy during November about >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> this R530 system and the use of a 40G Chelsio T-580-CR card. So = far, we >>>>>> have not experienced results above 1.4 million or so. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Any help would be appreciated. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> - Jordan >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> -------- Forwarded Message -------- >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Subject: Re: Disappointing packets-per-second performance = results on a =20 >>>>>> Dell,PE R530 = =20 >>>>>> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 13:53:15 -0400 = =20 >>>>>> From: Jordan Caraballo = =20 >>>>>> To: Slawa Olhovchenkov = =20 >>>>>> CC: freebsd-net@freebsd.org = =20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> This are the most recent stats. No advances so far. The system = has >>>>>> -Current right now. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Any help or feedback would be appreciated. >>>>>> Hardware Configuration: >>>>>> Dell PowerEdge R530 with 2 Intel(R) Xeon(R) E52695 CPU's, 18 = cores per >>>>>> cpu. Equipped with a Chelsio T-580-CR dual port in an 8x slot. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> BIOS tweaks: >>>>>> Hyperthreading (or Logical Processors) is turned off. >>>>>> loader.conf >>>>>> # Chelsio Modules >>>>>> t4fw_cfg_load=3D"YES" >>>>>> t5fw_cfg_load=3D"YES" >>>>>> if_cxgbe_load=3D"YES" >>>>>> rc.conf >>>>>> # Gateway Configuration >>>>>> ifconfig_cxl0=3D"inet 172.16.1.1/24" >>>>>> ifconfig_cxl1=3D"inet 172.16.2.1/24" >>>>>> gateway_enable=3D"YES" >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Last Results: >>>>>> packets errs idrops bytes packets errs bytes colls drops >>>>>> 2.7M 0 2.0M 1.4G 696k 0 368M 0 0 >>>>>> 2.7M 0 2.0M 1.4G 686k 0 363M 0 0 >>>>>> 2.6M 0 2.0M 1.4G 668k 0 353M 0 0 >>>>>> 2.7M 0 2.0M 1.4G 661k 0 350M 0 0 >>>>>> 2.8M 0 2.1M 1.5G 697k 0 369M 0 0 >>>>>> 2.8M 0 2.1M 1.4G 684k 0 361M 0 0 >>>>>> 2.7M 0 2.1M 1.4G 674k 0 356M 0 0 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> root@router1:~ # vmstat -i >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> interrupt total rate >>>>>> irq9: acpi0 73 0 >>>>>> irq18: ehci0 ehci1 1155973 3=20 >>>>>> cpu0:timer 3551157 10 >>>>>> cpu29:timer 9303048 27 >>>>>> cpu9:timer 71693455 207 >>>>>> cpu16:timer 9798380 28 >>>>>> cpu18:timer 9287094 27 >>>>>> cpu26:timer 9342495 27 >>>>>> cpu20:timer 9145888 26 >>>>>> cpu8:timer 9791228 28 >>>>>> cpu22:timer 9288116 27 >>>>>> cpu35:timer 9376578 27 >>>>>> cpu30:timer 9396294 27 >>>>>> cpu23:timer 9248760 27 >>>>>> cpu10:timer 9756455 28 >>>>>> cpu25:timer 9300202 27 >>>>>> cpu27:timer 9227291 27 >>>>>> cpu14:timer 10083548 29 >>>>>> cpu28:timer 9325684 27 >>>>>> cpu11:timer 9906405 29 >>>>>> cpu34:timer 9419170 27 >>>>>> cpu31:timer 9392089 27 >>>>>> cpu33:timer 9350540 27 >>>>>> cpu15:timer 9804551 28 >>>>>> cpu32:timer 9413182 27 >>>>>> cpu19:timer 9231505 27 >>>>>> cpu12:timer 9813506 28 >>>>>> cpu13:timer 10872130 31 >>>>>> cpu4:timer 9920237 29 >>>>>> cpu2:timer 9786498 28 >>>>>> cpu3:timer 9896011 29 >>>>>> cpu5:timer 9890207 29 >>>>>> cpu6:timer 9737869 28 >>>>>> cpu7:timer 9790119 28 >>>>>> cpu1:timer 9847913 28 >>>>>> cpu21:timer 9192561 27 >>>>>> cpu24:timer 9300259 27 >>>>>> cpu17:timer 9786186 28 >>>>>> irq264: mfi0 151818 0 >>>>>> irq266: bge0 30466 0 >>>>>> irq272: t5nex0:evt 4 0 >>>>>> Total 402604945 1161 >>>>>> top -PHS >>>>>> last pid: 18557; load averages: 2.58, 1.90, 0.95 up 4+00:39:54 = 18:30:46 >>>>>> 231 processes: 40 running, 126 sleeping, 65 waiting >>>>>> CPU 0: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 1: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 2: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 3: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 4: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 5: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 6: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.4% system, 0.0% interrupt, 99.6% = idle >>>>>> CPU 7: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 8: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 9: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 10: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 11: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 12: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 13: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 14: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 15: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 16: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 17: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 18: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 19: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 20: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 21: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 22: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 23: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 24: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 25: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 26: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 59.6% interrupt, = 40.4% idle >>>>>> CPU 27: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 96.3% interrupt, 3.7% = idle >>>>>> CPU 28: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 29: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 30: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 31: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 32: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 33: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> CPU 34: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 100% interrupt, 0.0% = idle >>>>>> CPU 35: 0.0% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 100% = idle >>>>>> Mem: 15M Active, 224M Inact, 1544M Wired, 393M Buf, 29G Free >>>>>> Swap: 3881M Total, 3881M Free >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> pmcstat -R sample.out -G - | head >>>>>> @ CPU_CLK_UNHALTED_CORE [159 samples] >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 39.62% [63] acpi_cpu_idle_mwait @ /boot/kernel/kernel >>>>>> 100.0% [63] acpi_cpu_idle >>>>>> 100.0% [63] cpu_idle_acpi >>>>>> 100.0% [63] cpu_idle >>>>>> 100.0% [63] sched_idletd >>>>>> 100.0% [63] fork_exit >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 17.61% [28] cpu_idle @ /boot/kernel/kernel >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> root@router1:~ # pmcstat -R sample0.out -G - | head >>>>>> @ CPU_CLK_UNHALTED_CORE [750 samples] >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 31.60% [237] acpi_cpu_idle_mwait @ /boot/kernel/kernel >>>>>> 100.0% [237] acpi_cpu_idle >>>>>> 100.0% [237] cpu_idle_acpi >>>>>> 100.0% [237] cpu_idle >>>>>> 100.0% [237] sched_idletd >>>>>> 100.0% [237] fork_exit >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> 10.67% [80] cpu_idle @ /boot/kernel/kernel >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> On 03/01/17 13:46, Slawa Olhovchenkov wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 12:35:42PM -0400, Jordan Caraballo wrote: >>>>>>=20 >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> We recently tested a Dell R530 with a Chelsio T580 card, under = FreeBSD 10.3, 11.0, -STABLE and -CURRENT, and Centos 7. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Based on our research, including netmap-fwd and with the routing = improvements project (https://wiki.freebsd.org/ProjectsRoutingProposal), >>>>>> we hoped for packets-per-second (pps) in the 5+ million range, or = even higher. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Based on prior testing = (http://marc.info/?t=3D140604252400002&r=3D1&w=3D2), we expected 3-4 = Million to be easily obtainable. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Unfortunately, our current results top out at no more than 1.5 M = (64 bytes length packets) with FreeBSD, and >>>>>> surprisingly around 3.2 M (128 bytes length packets) with Centos = 7, and we are at a loss as to why. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Server Description: >>>>>> Dell PowerEdge R530 with 2 Intel(R) Xeon(R) E52695 CPU's, 18 = cores per >>>>>> cpu. Equipped with a Chelsio T-580-CR dual port in an 8x slot. >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> ** Can this be a lack in support issue related to the R530's = hardware? ** >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> Any help appreciated! >>>>>>=20 >>>>>> What hardware configuration? >>>>>> What BIOS setting? >>>>>> What loader.conf/sysctl.conf setting? >>>>>> What `vmstat -i`? >>>>>> What `top -PHS`? >>>>>> what >>>>>> =3D=3D=3D=3D >>>>>> pmcstat -S CPU_CLK_UNHALTED_CORE -l 10 -O sample.out >>>>>> pmcstat -R sample.out -G out.txt >>>>>> pmcstat -c 0 -S CPU_CLK_UNHALTED_CORE -l 10 -O sample0.out >>>>>> pmcstat -R sample0.out -G out0.txt >>>>>> =3D=3D=3D=3D >>=20 >> _______________________________________________ >> freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list >> https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net >> To unsubscribe, send any mail to = "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >=20 > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org"