From: Filip Janiszewski <contact@filipjaniszewski.com>
To: Steffen Weise <stweise.linux@gmail.com>
Cc: users@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] MLX ConnectX-4 Discarding packets
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2021 16:34:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e695bfd1-d752-81f4-cb5e-89f8e0362be8@filipjaniszewski.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2712a21a-b0d0-cf80-87b6-76c51151e24d@filipjaniszewski.com>
I wanted just to add, while running the same exact testpmd on the other
machine I won't get a single miss with the same patter traffic:
.
testpmd> stop
Telling cores to stop...
Waiting for lcores to finish...
------- Forward Stats for RX Port= 0/Queue= 0 -> TX Port= 0/Queue= 0
-------
RX-packets: 61711939 TX-packets: 0 TX-dropped: 0
------- Forward Stats for RX Port= 0/Queue= 1 -> TX Port= 0/Queue= 1
-------
RX-packets: 62889424 TX-packets: 0 TX-dropped: 0
------- Forward Stats for RX Port= 0/Queue= 2 -> TX Port= 0/Queue= 2
-------
RX-packets: 61914199 TX-packets: 0 TX-dropped: 0
------- Forward Stats for RX Port= 0/Queue= 3 -> TX Port= 0/Queue= 3
-------
RX-packets: 63484438 TX-packets: 0 TX-dropped: 0
---------------------- Forward statistics for port 0
----------------------
RX-packets: 250000000 RX-dropped: 0 RX-total: 250000000
TX-packets: 0 TX-dropped: 0 TX-total: 0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
+++++++++++++++ Accumulated forward statistics for all
ports+++++++++++++++
RX-packets: 250000000 RX-dropped: 0 RX-total: 250000000
TX-packets: 0 TX-dropped: 0 TX-total: 0
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
.
In the lab I've the EPYC connected directly to the Xeon using a 100GbE
link, both same RHL8.4 and same DPDK 21.02, running:
.
./dpdk-testpmd -l 21-31 -n 8 -w 81:00.1 -- -i --rxq=4 --txq=4
--burst=64 --forward-mode=rxonly --rss-ip --total-num-mbufs=4194304
--nb-cores=4
.
and sending from the other end with pktgen, the EPYC loss tons of
packets (see my previous email), the Xeon don't loss anything.
*Confusion!*
Il 9/11/21 4:19 PM, Filip Janiszewski ha scritto:
> Thanks,
>
> I knew that document and we've implemented many of those settings/rules,
> but perhaps there's one crucial I've forgot? Wonder which one.
>
> Anyway, increasing the amount of queues impinge the performance, while
> sending 250M packets over a 100GbE link to an Intel 810-cqda2 NIC
> mounted on the EPYC Milan server, i see:
>
> .
> 1 queue, 30Gbps, ~45Mpps, 64B frame = imiss: 54,590,111
> 2 queue, 30Gbps, ~45Mpps, 64B frame = imiss: 79,394,138
> 4 queue, 30Gbps, ~45Mpps, 64B frame = imiss: 87,414,030
> .
>
> With DPDK 21.02 on RHL8.4. I can't observe this situation while
> capturing from my Intel server where increasing the queues leads to
> better performance (while with the test input set I drop with one queue,
> I do not drop anymore with 2 on the Intel server.)
>
> A customer with a brand new EPYC Milan server in his lab observed as
> well this scenario which is a bit of a worry, but again it might be some
> config/compilation issue we need do deal with?
>
> BTW, the same issue can be reproduced with testpmd, using 4 queues and
> the same input data set (250M of 64bytes frame at 30Gbps):
>
> .
> testpmd> stop
> Telling cores to stop...
> Waiting for lcores to finish...
>
> ------- Forward Stats for RX Port= 0/Queue= 0 -> TX Port= 0/Queue= 0
> -------
> RX-packets: 41762999 TX-packets: 0 TX-dropped: 0
>
>
> ------- Forward Stats for RX Port= 0/Queue= 1 -> TX Port= 0/Queue= 1
> -------
> RX-packets: 40152306 TX-packets: 0 TX-dropped: 0
>
>
> ------- Forward Stats for RX Port= 0/Queue= 2 -> TX Port= 0/Queue= 2
> -------
> RX-packets: 41153402 TX-packets: 0 TX-dropped: 0
>
>
> ------- Forward Stats for RX Port= 0/Queue= 3 -> TX Port= 0/Queue= 3
> -------
> RX-packets: 38341370 TX-packets: 0 TX-dropped: 0
>
>
> ---------------------- Forward statistics for port 0
> ----------------------
> RX-packets: 161410077 RX-dropped: 88589923 RX-total: 250000000
> TX-packets: 0 TX-dropped: 0 TX-total: 0
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> .
>
> .
> testpmd> show port xstats 0
> ###### NIC extended statistics for port 0
> rx_good_packets: 161410081
> tx_good_packets: 0
> rx_good_bytes: 9684605284
> tx_good_bytes: 0
> rx_missed_errors: 88589923
> .
>
> Can't figure out what's wrong here..
>
>
> Il 9/11/21 12:20 PM, Steffen Weise ha scritto:
>> Hi Filip,
>>
>> i have not seen the same issues.
>> Are you aware of this tuning guide? I applied it and had no issues with
>> intel 100G NIC.
>>
>> HPC Tuning Guide for AMD EPYC Processors
>> http://developer.amd.com/wp-content/resources/56420.pdf
>> <http://developer.amd.com/wp-content/resources/56420.pdf>
>>
>> Hope it helps.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Steffen Weise
>>
>>
>>> Am 11.09.2021 um 10:56 schrieb Filip Janiszewski
>>> <contact@filipjaniszewski.com>:
>>>
>>> I ran more tests,
>>>
>>> This AMD server is a bit confusing, I can tune it to capture 28Mpps (64
>>> bytes frame) from one single core, so I would assume that using one more
>>> core will at least increase a bit the capture capabilities, but it's
>>> not, 1% more speed and it drops regardless of how many queues are
>>> configured - I've not observed this situation on the Intel server, where
>>> adding more queues/cores scale to higher throughput.
>>>
>>> This issue have been verified now with both Mellanox and Intel (810
>>> series, 100GbE) NICs.
>>>
>>> Anybody encountered anything similar?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Il 9/10/21 3:34 PM, Filip Janiszewski ha scritto:
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I've switched a 100Gbe MLX ConnectX-4 card from an Intel Xeon server to
>>>> an AMD EPYC server (running 75F3 CPU, 256GiB of RAM and PCIe4 lanes),
>>>> and using the same capture software we can't get any faster than 10Gbps,
>>>> when exceeding that speed regardless of the amount of queues configured
>>>> the rx_discards_phy counter starts to raise and packets are lost in huge
>>>> amounts.
>>>>
>>>> On the Xeon machine, I was able to get easily to 50Gbps with 4 queues.
>>>>
>>>> Is there any specific DPDK configuration that we might want to setup for
>>>> those AMD servers? The software is DPDK based so I wonder if some build
>>>> option is missing somewhere.
>>>>
>>>> What else I might want to look for to investigate this issue?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> BR, Filip
>>> +48 666 369 823
>
--
BR, Filip
+48 666 369 823
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-09-11 14:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-09-10 13:34 Filip Janiszewski
2021-09-11 8:56 ` Filip Janiszewski
2021-09-11 10:20 ` Steffen Weise
2021-09-11 14:19 ` Filip Janiszewski
2021-09-11 14:34 ` Filip Janiszewski [this message]
2021-09-12 9:32 ` Filip Janiszewski
2021-09-29 10:43 ` Thomas Monjalon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=e695bfd1-d752-81f4-cb5e-89f8e0362be8@filipjaniszewski.com \
--to=contact@filipjaniszewski.com \
--cc=stweise.linux@gmail.com \
--cc=users@dpdk.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).