Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 01:09:29 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: net@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 237072] netgraph(4): performance issue [on HardenedBSD]? Message-ID: <bug-237072-7501-r0F7H1pYmW@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-237072-7501@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-237072-7501@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=237072 --- Comment #14 from Larry Rosenman <ler@FreeBSD.org> --- More information from Austin Robertson (aus on github): Hey Larry, I hope you don't mind me emailing you, but I've seen you've been posting about a similar issue I experienced in regards to netgraph performance with pfatt. (I had seen some freebsd.org bug report referrals in my Github repo's traffic analytics) In my experience, the netgraph configuration in pfatt can max out a single core when reaching gigabit speeds. In some cases, the single core performance of the process can handle it. In other cases, it cannot and speed suffers. In the case of another user, their C2758 CPU wasn't getting full gigabit performance. Upgrading to a beefier E3-1230v6 got them the full line speeds. When being throttled by the CPU, I see a high percentage of interrupts (relative to core count) against the NIC via systat -vmstat. I suspect that the extra packet processing isn't hardware accelerated by the NIC and being handled in kernel space by netgraph. BSD and performance aren't my expertise, and you seem to be more savvy in those areas. I thought I'd pass along my experience. If you come up with a solution, I'd definitely like to here it! -- You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-237072-7501-r0F7H1pYmW>