Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Mon, 26 Sep 2022 09:49:39 -0700
From:      John Fieber <jrf@ursamaris.org>
To:        mike tancsa <mike@sentex.net>
Cc:        "Pieper, Jeffrey E" <jeffrey.e.pieper@intel.com>, Jim King <jim@jimking.net>, stable@freebsd.org, kbowling@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: igc problems with heavy traffic (update)
Message-ID:  <244B1651-9A4D-4E38-A89B-B1610992A249@ursamaris.org>
In-Reply-To: <b4d1353f-f2ab-f8a0-fbb1-208c4ee39eac@sentex.net>
References:  <b4d1353f-f2ab-f8a0-fbb1-208c4ee39eac@sentex.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

> On Sep 26, 2022, at 5:57 AM, mike tancsa <mike@sentex.net> wrote:
>=20
> =EF=BB=BFOn 9/24/2022 8:30 PM, John Fieber wrote:
>>>> On Sep 14, 2022, at 8:03 AM, mike tancsa <mike@sentex.net> wrote:
>>>=20
>>> OK, an update hence the top post. I got a new pair of boxes which use a d=
ifferent Jasper Lake chipset and have i226-V vs the i225 of the previous box=
.
>>>=20
>>> dev.igc.0.%parent: pci2
>>> dev.igc.0.%pnpinfo: vendor=3D0x8086 device=3D0x125c subvendor=3D0x8086 s=
ubdevice=3D0x0000 class=3D0x020000
>>> dev.igc.0.%location: slot=3D0 function=3D0 dbsf=3Dpci0:2:0:0 handle=3D\_=
SB_.PC00.RP05.PXSX
>>> dev.igc.0.%driver: igc
>>> dev.igc.0.%desc: Intel(R) Ethernet Controller I226-V
>>> dev.igc.%parent:
>>>=20
>>> WIth a default RELENG_13, out of the box with no tweaks, I am NOT able t=
o cause the transmitting nic to bounce with heave traffic. I used the same t=
est script (a constant stream of iperf3 alternating in direction) maxing out=
 the NIC's bandwidth and all seems fine running the test for some 18hrs.  Ma=
ybe something different about the i225 version of this NIC that needs some d=
ifferent driver defaults ?
>>>=20
>>>     ---Mike
>>>=20
>> I also see this behavior with 13.1-RELEASE-p2 on:
>>=20
>> These, however, offer unflappable performance:
>>=20
>> - FreeBSD-14.0-CURRENT-amd64-20220923
>> - vyos-1.4 (for reference, what I mostly use on this hardware, via bhyve)=

>>=20
> Interesting, so just to confirm, the same hardware i225, the igc under 14.=
x does not see link drops under heavy load ?  I wonder what the difference i=
s, since the driver does not seem to be different ?

Correct.  NIC chips are SLNMH, B3 stepping. All the other OS versions starte=
d dropping within a minute. 14-CURRENT ran for an hour at about 2.3 gigabit w=
ithout a single hiccup.  All the tests were done with a fresh OS install in b=
hyve (with pci passthrough for the nics) followed by =E2=80=9Cpkg install ip=
erf3=E2=80=9D and no other tweaks. The switch port was configured with flow c=
ontrol and EEE off in all cases.

I ran the tests with the test OS as the iperf client, with -R and -P4 argume=
nts. -R was always the quickest failure path. The hour long run on 14-CURREN=
T was with --bidi, after -R alone failed to fail after five minutes.

The hardware in question is my spare one of three identical 4x2.5g ali-expre=
ss celeron J4125 boxes, and as such open for more and/or longer experiments.=
 (My spare time to fiddle is a bigger constraint.)

-john





Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?244B1651-9A4D-4E38-A89B-B1610992A249>