From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Mon Oct 19 21:05:21 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 05D6E434C43 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 21:05:21 +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 4CFTmc6JwTz4Csc for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 21:05:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) id D8B44434BFD; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 21:05:20 +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 D8787434F60 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 21:05:20 +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 4CFTmc5Qt9z4Cn0 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 21:05:20 +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 9E60A9F4F for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 21:05:20 +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 09JL5KjL020637 for ; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 21:05:20 GMT (envelope-from bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org) Received: (from www@localhost) by kenobi.freebsd.org (8.15.2/8.15.2/Submit) id 09JL5Krx020636 for net@FreeBSD.org; Mon, 19 Oct 2020 21:05:20 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, 19 Oct 2020 21:05:18 +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, 19 Oct 2020 21:05:21 -0000 https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D248652 --- Comment #25 from Vincenzo Maffione --- Sorry, my bad. I read the code the wrong way, so the second patch is indeed useless. Please forget about that. The patch is not ensuring timely TX slots recovery (as pointed out in comment #23). So it seems that the situation where we are losing against 11-stable is ixl with 6 queues (or more in general, with more than 1 queue). The other combinations (ix, or ixl/1q are on par). Is this correct? Now, focusing on the ixl/6q case, and using the first patch I provided, do = you see a significant difference in average batch (as reported by pkt-gen) and pkt-gen CPU utilization? The avg_batch metric tells us how many packets we were able to send for each txsync syscall. So the higher the better (at least up to 100/200). --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.=