Date: Thu, 6 May 2021 11:56:44 -0400 From: Mark Johnston <markj@freebsd.org> To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=D6zkan?= KIRIK <ozkan.kirik@gmail.com> Cc: "Andrey V. Elsukov" <bu7cher@yandex.ru>, FreeBSD Net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: IPsec performace - netisr hits %100 Message-ID: <YJQRvHHLJlwDaPJZ@nuc> In-Reply-To: <CAAcX-AG7nS%2B14dw8eDPvH_33SKYP8hsUUnvpSg%2B5EkLJSs5jkQ@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAAcX-AF=0s5tueCuanFKkoALNkRnWJ-8QrzfCqSu=ReoWvqMug@mail.gmail.com> <YIxpdL9b6v8%2BN%2BLg@nuc> <50cfc0e6-5cc6-7004-2566-bc06428d4394@yandex.ru> <YJBPfQrBuTjdDQvZ@nuc> <CAAcX-AG7nS%2B14dw8eDPvH_33SKYP8hsUUnvpSg%2B5EkLJSs5jkQ@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, May 06, 2021 at 05:07:30PM +0300, Özkan KIRIK wrote: > I wonder that if you received the flame graphs ? Yes, there's nothing obviously problematic there. > I also tested system with multiple if_ipsec interfaces using different > source-dst tunnel address. > By this way, system can utilize all cpu cores. > But for single if_ipsec interface, is there a way to speed up transfer ? Did you see Andrey's comment regarding the MTU on the ipsec interface?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?YJQRvHHLJlwDaPJZ>