From owner-freebsd-net@freebsd.org Mon Mar 13 17:13:59 2017 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 F2BABD0AE62 for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 17:13:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jjasen@gmail.com) Received: from mail-qt0-x22a.google.com (mail-qt0-x22a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::22a]) (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 9BEF71C19 for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 17:13:58 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from jjasen@gmail.com) Received: by mail-qt0-x22a.google.com with SMTP id x35so36824054qtc.2 for ; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 10:13:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cviN9u3LBGx5EuaCPH5X8puNvMqcrF9s9I3AhnRXUJQ=; b=eYn6zdRHy9y9e8S0GF6RBzdn4PtsBWlpuGiL66ste8ldJ10gr+idA2Bc+PTy6+c5nq C5+KRXXD82bBL0pe/a+7FutG2YWymw1PoTieqFNkchXvkbTNVBTZFrLQ2ZGYuwsmdr0n lJp6uANuFVitTqMhklhVPG+RAVFfWza3JvgTnZ/0NI9x9EyFDaEX04R16ONITwb8UTyt HPWu2s8xMJTAsupG/83fRKw5G53tvi1AKBNChE54a4cGg8pTOeJas8w0MTclnHa29j8w T8KTvo7qEVk51aRxu6g24ASL/EJxx97F3a10xW2WlzhdHPekZNsjTHXouUoMcqeanT3Z Uy0A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=cviN9u3LBGx5EuaCPH5X8puNvMqcrF9s9I3AhnRXUJQ=; b=pOASexSqjLghiYDzjc0AqyBk06jJVIO8hRQz7JCR3PtYmrfGRr3Qj8bs+xfy3xHC1U 2AckqX/VEVDlb0Cts9wEhdUONAXY+iZyB3u3KwS4qovq83OKB0yBPipVUHTD4khsn8Hb P6NKFnUE+8DqGEqORg0se0DnOabGBKf+gHM4tYwLC2cJzroKZvTIHoYTOYmMmMXYiBiF 12xUSaDkpbg+pqeMbNoMjlgOYF2q+DsiCKYt+ClW3UaJMmh9iudOSuL4fWSixjyX+grd TgHNctUS+Th2Z0oj8iKiYepqEkKSj2TGsXuj/jZiUTHepZjF5ZWdPXneNW9v68bkfj9o h+Gw== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39kwF7ucO2qdRl8baMYGwdlISzTwkodbdli8xspRo9XyW34I8W5u3W9+my4Ab/LP4g== X-Received: by 10.237.49.195 with SMTP id 61mr36102975qth.82.1489425236683; Mon, 13 Mar 2017 10:13:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [10.1.28.202] ([198.119.59.10]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id q145sm12561313qke.39.2017.03.13.10.13.55 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 13 Mar 2017 10:13:56 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: bad throughput performance on multiple systems: Re: Fwd: Re: Disappointing packets-per-second performance results on a Dell,PE R530 To: Navdeep Parhar References: <40a413f3-2c44-ee9d-9961-67114d8dffca@gmail.com> <20170205175531.GA20287@dwarf> <7d349edd-0c81-2e3f-d3b9-27af232de76d@gmail.com> <20170209153409.GG41673@dwarf> <6ad029e0-86c6-af3d-8fc3-694d4bcdc683@gmail.com> <20170312231826.GV15630@zxy.spb.ru> <74654520-b8b6-6118-2e46-902a8ea107ac@gmail.com> Cc: Slawa Olhovchenkov , "freebsd-net@freebsd.org" , "Caraballo-vega, Jordan A." From: John Jasen Message-ID: <173fffac-7ae2-786a-66c0-e9cd7ab78f44@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 13:13:55 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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, 13 Mar 2017 17:13:59 -0000 On 03/13/2017 01:03 PM, Navdeep Parhar wrote: > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 5:35 PM, John Jasen wrote: >> UDP traffic. dmesg reports 16 txq, 8 rxq -- which is the default for >> Chelsio. >> > I don't recall offhand, but UDP might be using 2-tuple hashing by > default and that might affect the distribution of flows across queues. > Are there senders generating IP fragments by any chance (that'll > depend on the "send size" that your UDP application is using)? No, they're not fragmenting. > Have you tried limiting the adapter's rx ithreads to the CPU that the > PCIe slot with the adapter is wired to? Above and beyond the use of cpuset, you mean?