From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Sat Jan 23 18:38:40 2016 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 B1BFDA8FB86 for ; Sat, 23 Jan 2016 18:38:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nparhar@gmail.com) Received: from mail-pf0-x22b.google.com (mail-pf0-x22b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::22b]) (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 78FF31368 for ; Sat, 23 Jan 2016 18:38:40 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from nparhar@gmail.com) Received: by mail-pf0-x22b.google.com with SMTP id n128so59390199pfn.3 for ; Sat, 23 Jan 2016 10:38:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=wVMZzmeFkn/WaEPW4kK/xg5Y/UvjIqXVNF35QCo2GEA=; b=WQr6hd1oWuBl8j9kKgIO7Qw/avlbWKOOflXQuY9suD74P7plVo4EucF2NPbwlh/yMv GtRUZOt2DYIrZxvotTLFF9c/lWXZyaYPWgZjfgzs3Dx5d98Dbru2AP7mA+j8ytIqDze5 +PGRVbk2jsRqr3+ZVjENQ0H9qZh6BULwuhuOcgG60ZCAM8qYyXSb5brRcCBUS5b7LtD4 zWLAypVOBBkDTz5ND+PFvAq/bI/+ekrlFnbcIJOjSG8fzdfekol3i2yoDxh79EbDTNLU yxJfPjiWRY3V7hBV7wgRCFqhCIDr+ApdwGW8E2/5YeNE5QKeutugxmLuvUGXIwsMWloT 53ew== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id :mail-followup-to:references:mime-version:content-type :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=wVMZzmeFkn/WaEPW4kK/xg5Y/UvjIqXVNF35QCo2GEA=; b=eGGeKqjEeeXOujx7rSPuG56nEZ1ohIRCHkPYKuSw+SSTkrLromeZDASW7zHgE2f3XV qZI2l2izmIUOL/hKnSr8mXwt6cAIfTWTUXXC8GIVdsrZxeTT6ygkhlPYx9u7jJAbnTkB 5fjnkSSx4Sju2e+g/+bE34jKyBe4yLUW6WtUYFScZ0zLkV4WmdJoOAgG6VElvKQ4W/CM cu7eSbuKeawALDbdyhdBdFw03tklRskmrZ5L7dSmqpKV2uGAdjU0+RanXC+EoUgTJt3j 3ZQLalWusTAu3R/d/xyT4+beoOWuyPlMFwO+CmIJm1oVa8pOdrvlOaPtafH4d1qb5xPe /pqw== X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOT0TjNL39l/zheeR8qmDm2d9HLQvScHsBgANR4g3ROZoWeJTKKcIieB5IjFwZ4v5w== X-Received: by 10.98.13.195 with SMTP id 64mr13731917pfn.164.1453574320120; Sat, 23 Jan 2016 10:38:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from ox ([2601:641:c001:8a00:591d:d471:ff4a:b8bf]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id i76sm17855992pfj.68.2016.01.23.10.38.38 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 23 Jan 2016 10:38:38 -0800 (PST) Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2016 10:38:36 -0800 From: Navdeep Parhar To: Marcus Cenzatti Cc: Luigi Rizzo , freebsd-net@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Chelsio T520-SO-CR low performance (netmap tested) for RX Message-ID: <20160123183836.GB4574@ox> Mail-Followup-To: Marcus Cenzatti , Luigi Rizzo , freebsd-net@freebsd.org References: <20160123053428.2091EA0121@smtp.hushmail.com> <20160123154052.GA4574@ox> <20160123171300.0F448A0121@smtp.hushmail.com> <20160123174840.32B1DA0121@smtp.hushmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160123174840.32B1DA0121@smtp.hushmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2016 18:38:40 -0000 On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 03:48:39PM -0200, Marcus Cenzatti wrote: ... > > woops, my bad, yes probably we had some drop, with -S and -D now I get 1.2Mpps. Run "netstat -hdw1 -i cxl" on the receiver during your test. Do you see errs and/or idrops incrementing? The input "packets" counter should match what the transmitter is claiming to transmit at. Also check the output of this: # sysctl -n dev.t5nex.0.misc.tp_err_stats It is ok if you see tnlCongDrops, but any of the Errs counter going up is not good -- it means the incoming frames had errors. Do you know if the transmitter will pad up so as not to put runts on the wire? If not then you might want to bump up the size of the frame explicitly (there's some pkt-gen knob for this). Regards, Navdeep > > curiously, I have always used -s/-d with IP addresses on ix-ix testing this is > why I never noticed the case, since ix always received 14Mpps, but you > probably explained it since ix has one single deviceport per wire, hence the > different behavior > > performance stills very low when compared to TX and to what is expected > > thank you for noticing the case > > >