Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 7 Jun 2017 23:04:16 +0200
From:      Vincenzo Maffione <v.maffione@gmail.com>
To:        Harry Schmalzbauer <freebsd@omnilan.de>
Cc:        freebsd-net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org>
Subject:   Re: ovs-netmap forgotten?
Message-ID:  <CA%2B_eA9ibDwqbY42f0UE4Pwe9xJ3Yn%2B0BOcxuHp3h8sq4iJO2DQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <59367CF5.9080101@omnilan.de>
References:  <5926FFDB.7040900@omnilan.de> <592F20A0.4020702@omnilan.de> <CA%2B_eA9i5ZJuz34WmnHfovtgX5o8a=yzpe18L8Qeoai%2B7wf4k6Q@mail.gmail.com> <592FC60A.1030308@omnilan.de> <CA%2B_eA9i4wwjXYNata6eJKBAMeAeQ2YMheeev6_juStf42EhBTQ@mail.gmail.com> <5935A20A.6040000@omnilan.de> <59367CF5.9080101@omnilan.de>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
You can play with NIC interrupt coalescing settings to keep them under
control (I don't know how in FreeBSD, but in Linux you would do that with
e.g. "ethtool -C rx-usecs 100").
As written in the last line of netmap(4), you must disable all the
offloadings when playing with netmap physical ports.

By the way, there is a person working on adding some offloading support to
netmap, but this is still in progress and it is not even in the netmap
github yet.

Cheers,
  Vincenzo

2017-06-06 11:59 GMT+02:00 Harry Schmalzbauer <freebsd@omnilan.de>:

>  Bez=C3=BCglich Harry Schmalzbauer's Nachricht vom 05.06.2017 20:25 (loca=
ltime):
> > Bez=C3=BCglich Vincenzo Maffione's Nachricht vom 05.06.2017 16:06 (loca=
ltime):
> >
> =E2=80=A6
> > First quick test shows you're right and this tiny diff solves a decent
> > share of my (ESXi-replacing) problems:
> >
> > --- src/sys/net/if_vlan.c.orig  2017-06-05 17:39:27.770574000 +0200
> > +++ src/sys/net/if_vlan.c       2017-06-05 17:39:21.550278000 +0200
> > @@ -1234,7 +1234,7 @@
> >         if_inc_counter(ifv->ifv_ifp, IFCOUNTER_IPACKETS, 1);
> >
> >         /* Pass it back through the parent's input routine. */
> > -       (*ifp->if_input)(ifv->ifv_ifp, m);
> > +       (*ifv->ifv_ifp->if_input)(ifv->ifv_ifp, m);
> >  }
> >
> >  static int
> >
> > Will do real-world tests tommorrow.
>
> To share my observations:
>
> Attaching if_vlan(4) to vale(4) works with the above modification, as
> long as vlanhwtag is _not_ disabled, at least with igb(4) and (em4).
> Having other offloadings enabled or disabled (regardless if it's on
> parent or vlan-clone) doesn't matter, disabling vlanhwtag on the parent
> leads to congested parent if there's mor etraffic than console... I
> haven't done any tracking if it's caused by TCP windows scaling e.g. nor
> tried to ask the code, because I do want vlanhwtagging enabled and
> that's what works so far :-)
> This is also true for if_vlan(4) interfaces which have if_lagg(0) as
> parent, and also for both types of vale(4) attaching, hoststack-detached
> (-a) or hoststack-attached (-h).
> So far very nice :-)
>
> But there's a interrupt multiplication noticeable (at the host).
>
> My simple NFS-copying test causes ~10ki/s at one igb(4) queue when
> invoked on the host, with mtu 1500.
> Same invocation in the guest, with vlan-vale setup, causes 30ki/s
> average (with high discrepancy, 20-40k).
>
> Might it be possible that if_vlan(4) influences interrupt moderation
> capabilities?
>
> Vincenzo, thanks for your answers to my questions, which I read during
> writing of this - stripping them here.
>
> -harry
>



--=20
Vincenzo Maffione



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CA%2B_eA9ibDwqbY42f0UE4Pwe9xJ3Yn%2B0BOcxuHp3h8sq4iJO2DQ>