From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mails.dpdk.org (mails.dpdk.org [217.70.189.124]) by inbox.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 857B74552C for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2024 20:42:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09B9F40EE1; Sat, 29 Jun 2024 20:42:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-pg1-f182.google.com (mail-pg1-f182.google.com [209.85.215.182]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 225D7402C2 for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2024 20:42:34 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pg1-f182.google.com with SMTP id 41be03b00d2f7-71910dfb8c0so978084a12.3 for ; Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:42:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=domainhart-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1719686554; x=1720291354; darn=dpdk.org; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=HhN+98AlSddZZ1owI6AR2G/XtlHYISRFMsmi5TJLAhY=; b=h2zMK/EOBIngLZTvTjIw9+yccF8tOkgv/OPHPfy941V8eC+oiEX2hYusu8iFtR60Zn 1TjhFGsaRaR3z22pbhWw9NIhw7W58hYWXfAfbrwpeAygekNr81nUzLMrYB1gPjeV7/cI eDvkOZ5tS0fZFnH8tMFrf59H6kvpeivo8mu8M8tcu/WZy5h0emh3V9gVo6YCWg+PBOrk ud2/BNNa0QvH2nzaqoIs1Dzkq6qmPShggGmV348JHFxZ4PjQ/aXKfC1qKo/XnyR19daQ 39P2H28eVSnFj3yczo/+zhcwOQLwJv7OguAUIiwHmt6cwkID3ub/vrzkA9kuejcg3cHH 2O0w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1719686554; x=1720291354; h=to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=HhN+98AlSddZZ1owI6AR2G/XtlHYISRFMsmi5TJLAhY=; b=sIx9oajDmqFNecGnzhUP46tYn1zVNN+99EaK4gDcP9ON1z2gfPFtmjBScMfefAK1e7 1dGJKy/cGH1dMWpi/xzobpRZ8YsNA2JMaHduSesxdXWcLqeKEO33An1Ft02Q8HrfA+FB N0uPH7FZIpBOB9Hi3Yq+y3tGLQQ+B/lsMRjcrPF7TLWyhJ3tNFrPL8n16j0VwFs6KLm0 NRAbhQfomrIktrkHchk25qL7lJx2NuzqAyGPhDqvqvZqLLqPvq58pONp/eC43ocn4jNK 4MxZFwzilIsDvd9rADPsd/bKrR9TPfNlJdVXbmX6q3Pmzi+lAhPNpzK6txDBdM6zVuP1 tA0g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxRVoh16XWv4ehXgKOl9KKzuwK0kkiUkK0+5CWwhC1flmkqWhlM B9gOjI/o3nGH6E4oIUdBr0og4JBlCrPQ/D0NWLLjZAQwbXjjMKSouaiYgTbWU0VqC3cAaqJg6SU LzAhSL9dO6zssjxUKoGpxRBsjM7mcNPe/XT0YxoIZinkbKYMr X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEaSGuTaqk2f1usYfHIBVscMUcGFvGSXCdBbq66TQ089rO/m9DYiJt4BiWyeprcwXd7qsGYpdwSSGMJGsXYgco= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a20:918f:b0:1be:e5c3:f97a with SMTP id adf61e73a8af0-1bef610e640mr1914630637.3.1719686553616; Sat, 29 Jun 2024 11:42:33 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Tony Hart Date: Sat, 29 Jun 2024 14:42:21 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Performance of CX7 with 3 flow groups versus 2 To: users@dpdk.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000276ff1061c0bba82" X-BeenThere: users@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK usage discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: users-bounces@dpdk.org --000000000000276ff1061c0bba82 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I didn't mention that the packet size used for the tests was 68 Bytes. Also note there is a typo in the profile setting, the PIR rate used was 1200000000 (not 150000000). However this does not seem to make any difference to the results. On Fri, Jun 28, 2024 at 5:53=E2=80=AFAM Tony Hart wrote: > I'm seeing an unexpected performance drop on the CX7 when using 3 groups > (with a policer) versus 3 groups (without policer) versus (2 groups witho= ut > policer). The performance of each configuration is 72 Gbps, 104 Gbps an= d > 124 Gbps respectively. So the first configuration drops to almost half > the performance of the third even though all 3 are just hairpinning packe= ts > (the policier is used to color the packet only, no fate actions are taken > as a result). > > This is on a 400G link and using SWS mode. I know there was a similar > issue reported on this mailing list recently related to SWS versus HWS > performance, but this issue seems different. > > Any thoughts welcome. > > thanks > tony > > These are the testpmd commands used to recreate the issue... > > > *Common commands:*add port meter profile trtcm_rfc4115 0 1 1000 150000000 > 1000 1000 1 > > add port meter policy 0 1 g_actions end y_actions end r_actions drop / e= nd > > create port meter 0 1 1 1 yes 0xffff 0 g 0 > > > > *3 groups with policer* > flow create 0 ingress group 0 pattern end actions jump group 1 / end > > flow create 0 ingress group 1 pattern end actions meter mtr_id 1 / jump > group 2 / end > > flow create 0 ingress group 2 pattern eth / ipv4 / end actions count / rs= s > queues 6 7 8 9 end / end > > > > *3 groups without policer* > flow create 0 ingress group 0 pattern end actions jump group 1 / end > > flow create 0 ingress group 1 pattern end actions jump group 2 / end > > flow create 0 ingress group 2 pattern eth / ipv4 / end actions count / rs= s > queues 6 7 8 9 end / end > > > > *2 groups without policer* > flow create 0 ingress group 0 pattern end actions jump group 1 / end > > flow create 0 ingress group 1 pattern eth / ipv4 / end actions count / rs= s > queues 6 7 8 9 end / end > > thanks, > tony > > *testpmd command line* > /dpdk-testpmd -l8-14 -a81:00.0,dv_flow_en=3D1 -- -i --nb-cores 6 --rxq 6 > --txq 6 --port-topology loop --forward-mode=3Drxonly --hairpinq 4 > --hairpin-mode 0x10 > > > *Versions* > mlnx-ofa_kernel-24.04-OFED.24.04.0.6.6.1.rhel9u4.x86_64 > kmod-mlnx-ofa_kernel-24.04-OFED.24.04.0.6.6.1.rhel9u4.x86_64 > mlnx-ofa_kernel-devel-24.04-OFED.24.04.0.6.6.1.rhel9u4.x86_64 > ofed-scripts-24.04-OFED.24.04.0.6.6.x86_64 > > DPDK: v24.03 > > --=20 tony --000000000000276ff1061c0bba82 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I didn't mention that the packet size used for the tes= ts was 68 Bytes.

Also note there is a typo in the profil= e setting, the PIR rate used was 1200000000 (not 150000000).=C2=A0 However = this does not seem to make any difference to the results.

On Fri, Jun = 28, 2024 at 5:53=E2=80=AFAM Tony Hart <tony.hart@domainhart.com> wrote:
I'm seeing an unexp= ected performance=C2=A0drop on the CX7 when using 3 groups (with a policer)= versus 3 groups (without=C2=A0policer) versus (2 groups without policer).= =C2=A0 The performance of each configuration is=C2=A0 72 Gbps, 104 Gbps=C2= =A0and 124 Gbps=C2=A0respectively.=C2=A0 =C2=A0So the first configuration d= rops to almost half the performance of the third even though all 3 are just= hairpinning packets (the policier is used to color the packet only, no fat= e actions are taken as a result).

This is on a 400G link and using S= WS mode.=C2=A0 I know there was a similar issue reported on this mailing li= st recently related to SWS versus HWS performance, but this issue seems dif= ferent.

Any=C2=A0thoughts welcome.

thanks
tony

These are the testpmd commands used to rec= reate the issue...

Common commands:
add port meter profile= trtcm_rfc4115 0 1 1000 150000000 1000 1000 1

add port meter policy = 0 1 g_actions end y_actions end r_actions drop =C2=A0/ end

create po= rt meter 0 1 1 1 yes 0xffff 0 g 0


3 groups with policer

flow create 0 ingress group 0 pattern end actions jump group 1 / end<= br>
flow create 0 ingress group 1 pattern end actions meter mtr_id 1 / j= ump group 2 / end

flow create 0 ingress group 2 pattern eth / ipv4 /= end actions count / rss queues 6 7 8 9 end / end


3 groups wi= thout policer

flow create 0 ingress group 0 pattern end actions = jump group 1 / end

flow create 0 ingress group 1 pattern end actions= jump group 2 / end

flow create 0 ingress group 2 pattern eth / ipv4= / end actions count / rss queues 6 7 8 9 end / end


2 groups = without policer

flow create 0 ingress group 0 pattern end action= s jump group 1 / end

flow create 0 ingress group 1 pattern eth / ipv= 4 / end actions count / rss queues 6 7 8 9 end / end

thanks,
tony=

testpmd command line
/dpdk-testpmd -l8= -14 -a81:00.0,dv_flow_en=3D1 -- -i --nb-cores 6 --rxq 6 --txq 6 --port-topo= logy loop --forward-mode=3Drxonly --hairpinq 4 --hairpin-mode 0x10


Versions
mlnx-of= a_kernel-24.04-OFED.24.04.0.6.6.1.rhel9u4.x86_64
kmod-mlnx-ofa_kernel-24= .04-OFED.24.04.0.6.6.1.rhel9u4.x86_64
mlnx-ofa_kernel-devel-24.04-OFED.2= 4.04.0.6.6.1.rhel9u4.x86_64
ofed-scripts-24.04-OFED.24.04.0.6.6.x86_64
DPDK: v24.03



--
to= ny
--000000000000276ff1061c0bba82--