From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Mon Oct 26 21:47:22 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4C2AE4500CD for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 21:47:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (mailman.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:13]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CKpMt1JJZz3Y0x for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 21:47:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id 2AF174500CC; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 21:47:22 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: net@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2AB7244FEC4 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 21:47:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:3]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org", Issuer "Let's Encrypt Authority X3" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CKpMt025Dz3Y5w for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 21:47:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org (kenobi.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::50:1d]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (Client did not present a certificate) by mxrelay.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D881220D32 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 21:47:21 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: from kenobi.freebsd.org ([127.0.1.5]) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 09QLlLKd088958 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 21:47:21 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 09QLlLpp088957 for net@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 26 Oct 2020 21:47:21 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) X-Authentication-Warning: kenobi.freebsd.org: www set sender to bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org using -f From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 248652] iflib: netmap pkt-gen large TX performance difference between 11-STABLE and 12-STABLE/CURRENT on ix & ixl NIC Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 21:47:20 +0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: Base System X-Bugzilla-Component: kern X-Bugzilla-Version: 12.0-STABLE X-Bugzilla-Keywords: iflib, needs-qa, performance, regression X-Bugzilla-Severity: Affects Some People X-Bugzilla-Who: vmaffione@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Status: Open X-Bugzilla-Resolution: X-Bugzilla-Priority: --- X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: vmaffione@FreeBSD.org X-Bugzilla-Flags: maintainer-feedback? maintainer-feedback? mfc-stable12? mfc-stable11- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Bugzilla-URL: https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated MIME-Version: 1.0 X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2020 21:47:22 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D248652 --- Comment #39 from Vincenzo Maffione --- (In reply to Sylvain Galliano from comment #37) Ok thanks. It was worth a try. I guess we'll need some help from Intel here. In the meanwhile, I would like to commit the netmap tx timer change only. I attached a cleaned up patch, with an hardcoded value for the netmap timer. I would avoid to add a new sysctl for something that may be changed again s= oon. In any case, the patch is meant to improve a lot the current situation for = both ix and ixl. Could you please run your tests again on ix and ixl to check that you get numbers that are consistent with the ones you reported in comment n. 16? --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=