Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2013 11:39:12 -0700 (PDT) From: Barney Cordoba <barney_cordoba@yahoo.com> To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: it's the output, not ack coalescing (Re: TSO and FreeBSD vs Linux) Message-ID: <1376851152.3322.YahooMailNeo@web121606.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <CAJ-Vmo=0OX=_6cO_pZ45XrvfQzb%2BNVms00LUo5oRriZWUMBx%2Bg@mail.gmail.com> References: <520A6D07.5080106@freebsd.org> <520AFBE8.1090109@freebsd.org> <520B24A0.4000706@freebsd.org> <520B3056.1000804@freebsd.org> <20130814102109.GA63246@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <1376745244.6575.YahooMailNeo@web121606.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1376748170.66110.YahooMailNeo@web121601.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <CAJ-VmonGeqn5qqbfvF9xWaFPYNMNSVb6VwMx%2BoEVSGXVid98ag@mail.gmail.com> <1376833738.94737.YahooMailNeo@web121605.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <71EA3DFB-B410-432D-98E0-B6341556BE6D@netgate.com> <CAJ-Vmo=0OX=_6cO_pZ45XrvfQzb%2BNVms00LUo5oRriZWUMBx%2Bg@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Great. Never has the been a better explanation for the word Kludge than netmap. ________________________________ From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: Jim Thompson <jim@netgate.com> Cc: Barney Cordoba <barney_cordoba@yahoo.com>; FreeBSD Net <net@freebsd.org>; Luigi Rizzo <rizzo@iet.unipi.it>; Lawrence Stewart <lstewart@freebsd.org> Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2013 11:57 AM Subject: Re: it's the output, not ack coalescing (Re: TSO and FreeBSD vs Linux) Right. Well, post some profiling data, let's figure this out sometime. Luigi can do bridging with 2 cores using netmap. So it's technically possible. There's just a lot of kernel gunk in the way of doing it ye olde way. -adrian On 18 August 2013 07:25, Jim Thompson <jim@netgate.com> wrote: > > On Aug 18, 2013, at 8:48 AM, Barney Cordoba <barney_cordoba@yahoo.com> > wrote: > > > I could fill a tx queue with 10gb of traffic with yesteryear's cpus. > It's not an achievement. Being able to bridge > > real traffic at 10gb/s with 2 cores is > > Or forward at layer 3. > > Or filter packets. > > Or IPSEC. > > Or... _______________________________________________ From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Aug 18 19:18:37 2013 Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG> Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08972B9A for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Sun, 18 Aug 2013 19:18:37 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from adrian.chadd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-wg0-x236.google.com (mail-wg0-x236.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c00::236]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8D3962739 for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Sun, 18 Aug 2013 19:18:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wg0-f54.google.com with SMTP id e12so2959771wgh.9 for <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>; Sun, 18 Aug 2013 12:18:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s 120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bhíhvPd4JNvPgrVF2aFlH7WoRmqJCI5w7gkx6nODeUy4=; b=W2zVqVlu/sArglET4jknTc1sRBvGAX+K5EnD9GA3ns580rcMJq/KX744umETGSSsO/ kGduWmEfG2P2qO8gq1petSERqK/Z1VPQWHiTfWAAO0h6PIie+3TxUyzoEpZ3FRWPHxqe GLepEuKHz3hFH3QI4xhZ/Gk9Uey8AKQ3uhF9flvYnxo1q+mz0mE7IhnbdE6xyfFlVVdk pQwzSUELkYqXLNBfkj5CpfEDCM8jun+KC2v2qyT7NAbjA84fDQk2kMORWbHNeVnJufZa IDUg3YLKOiZ3j7pZSb5gsKbUALjmpR7BhLU2SzBEBMGealoPwBpK4DemoIlLRLyAFJVS N+3g=MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.180.37.164 with SMTP id z4mr5470283wij.30.1376853514182; Sun, 18 Aug 2013 12:18:34 -0700 (PDT) Sender: adrian.chadd@gmail.com Received: by 10.217.116.136 with HTTP; Sun, 18 Aug 2013 12:18:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1376851152.3322.YahooMailNeo@web121606.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <520A6D07.5080106@freebsd.org> <520AFBE8.1090109@freebsd.org> <520B24A0.4000706@freebsd.org> <520B3056.1000804@freebsd.org> <20130814102109.GA63246@onelab2.iet.unipi.it> <1376745244.6575.YahooMailNeo@web121606.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <1376748170.66110.YahooMailNeo@web121601.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <CAJ-VmonGeqn5qqbfvF9xWaFPYNMNSVb6VwMx+oEVSGXVid98ag@mail.gmail.com> <1376833738.94737.YahooMailNeo@web121605.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> <71EA3DFB-B410-432D-98E0-B6341556BE6D@netgate.com> <CAJ-Vmo=0OX=_6cO_pZ45XrvfQzb+NVms00LUo5oRriZWUMBx+g@mail.gmail.com> <1376851152.3322.YahooMailNeo@web121606.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2013 12:18:34 -0700 X-Google-Sender-Auth: -ac0bum_uBW0cJfLWgHjDga6TdQ Message-ID: <CAJ-VmokPhxAe1CAVqfKDJhssqg0VaUZT4hRPNB9gigECebh7VA@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: it's the output, not ack coalescing (Re: TSO and FreeBSD vs Linux) From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: Barney Cordoba <barney_cordoba@yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14 Cc: "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" <freebsd-net@freebsd.org> X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD <freebsd-net.freebsd.org> List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-net>, <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-net>; List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-net@freebsd.org> List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net>, <mailto:freebsd-net-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 18 Aug 2013 19:18:37 -0000 On 18 August 2013 11:39, Barney Cordoba <barney_cordoba@yahoo.com> wrote: > Great. Never has the been a better explanation for the word Kludge than > netmap. > Nah. Netmap is a reimplementation of some reasonably well known ways of pushing bits. Luigi just pushed it up to eleven and demonstrated what current hardware is capable of. I have never bought the "We need eleventy cores just to push 10ge of real traffic!" before. Luigi did note down where the per-packet inefficiencies were. What we have to do now is sit down and for each of those, figure out what the root causes are and how to mitigate it. There's some architectural things that need tidying up (read: CPU pinning, queue handling, some locking hilarity) but if they're solved, we'll end up having dual core boxes push line rate packets for routing. So the gauntlet has been thrown. Let's fix this shit up. -adrian
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1376851152.3322.YahooMailNeo>