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 46F14A034F for ; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 16:34:51 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [217.70.189.124] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B8B2240042; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 16:34:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from delivery.mailspamprotection.com (delivery.mailspamprotection.com [146.66.121.167]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8FBEA40041 for ; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 16:34:49 +0200 (CEST) Received: from 72.204.214.35.bc.googleusercontent.com ([35.214.204.72] helo=es18.siteground.eu) by se23.mailspamprotection.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mP45c-0003Qu-KF; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 09:34:48 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=filipjaniszewski.com; s=default; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type: In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Date:Message-ID:References:Cc:To:From:Subject:Sender :Reply-To:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From: Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help: List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=3VDUnuGeW9SmzDjVkIRypPEWV8w3M6c98CJ9cSq/AnI=; b=sCaqmvi07mrR4p5WrkX1nuKmAA y8FfrN53mKsB2QXZ9zV2kDQ0/1pnAWsZcNF/xOZkzcQFSCEldjhxXJrDsWbNDt1gS6OrY4DSywFmq azGAImBfjaMVG0W/GRnsH+MaKT7b/M5ACxnddbfso5Nk4gKby+QF3x2S79Zs63UMymnrXY0E79YOj WtSyL08NbPTuK3BluUBaArmwwNVLq7MQvqeU4bk9qnSQ84PTqju4IvV3HcpxVG0jj3gWDwfJ5t9A7 kOqm5rdQ6JJRiq1Ug4qL4QVPEITj+QAEZdS84e3H+mg9Kf7p+XfsGZlCnZlaCDYktGpupzY7q1zAI yMEhWNow==; Received: from [89.64.148.179] (port=35980 helo=localhost.localdomain) by es18.siteground.eu with esmtpsa (TLS1.2) tls TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (Exim 4.90-.1) (envelope-from ) id 1mP45b-0000aY-5Z; Sat, 11 Sep 2021 14:34:43 +0000 From: Filip Janiszewski To: Steffen Weise Cc: users@dpdk.org References: <57ab0193-689d-55b9-6f8c-dc23682e7c06@filipjaniszewski.com> <2712a21a-b0d0-cf80-87b6-76c51151e24d@filipjaniszewski.com> Message-ID: Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2021 16:34:42 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <2712a21a-b0d0-cf80-87b6-76c51151e24d@filipjaniszewski.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Originating-IP: 35.214.204.72 X-SpamExperts-Domain: es18.siteground.eu X-SpamExperts-Username: 35.214.204.72 Authentication-Results: mailspamprotection.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=35.214.204.72@es18.siteground.eu X-SpamExperts-Outgoing-Class: ham X-SpamExperts-Outgoing-Evidence: Combined (0.22) X-Recommended-Action: accept X-Filter-ID: Pt3MvcO5N4iKaDQ5O6lkdGlMVN6RH8bjRMzItlySaT9zy25BM3GxoutMyN4uV7lBPUtbdvnXkggZ 3YnVId/Y5jcf0yeVQAvfjHznO7+bT5xQ21np3XeN35PVwNbfU742zfqbYMULdwaQMxxW3TrGaZsL svigDeqWDWB7aWqQkldIWszBtjhxEU9cs2lF+uflgejwvRaUFZPLz3c9W3mxk/q2Gb7u1BCYlN7N u1YChzv4tYLALCM+o+XCApqo5SZSyhkGFfgvNMezqRomFqklfqUSJjyNCKDNmcFNT6sAheV0iuqG dkJHf9xZBqqhli8uVW5JC5amvJQpdJ9EAXqtfCG8zbKHB0C1O/ZLrxraAdrvwdVfoNV/a+1OHRPS IpcsJoC6vNdr2//RSmhr6GcYbus/uSyOilsPhBVg7F5S7c7hiJ4w9BD7a3IYFL5CQjmvjMhpwyKU nIZXKOkSA6DYPwHXl4wgwTqJlTT/fetzilMGV02hzj+6Clu59u5sr7HikapUBPW9YV4SESdWyVtF dVGH7sydZvDt9c5R0PA8ODZs3zuom9668jgWRpPOjHntJb0YJXBID1ReLHjEx6HJGsP8ohkWNmZ9 1xWMvZJV9xAnVPqyL1554ebyC2ywFfiZSLCg2wnBJUSSmMUBeDoS3TtekI7BGHoONie2pNu+H9t9 kzdW9FM7Vc286NJ72+KytvJEPlVaLzu80UIOeHt94FO1lblaGZ6uPbQglEFCn+Agr/U0flMcy2Vi /IcBgY4a4nD4ixtEBgLUs9VA8/4/8xQgoW7Jlml5bhJtfEFIJGtFBgUrTiENZKX4GMFYq/GfgTAQ YwMqFVbG1vgfzpewkl5BkU+VfkbU/2noV/k64y78g931Jmi0f4cPuxP7sbrmpMK9zzP9kXpBHo9z ZZTJLLmOxmzwoAnUna4F3Ewysb1CJ/k2Jo+Zn4s9cWJWa0GqRYMC/03+LtdNrtsb70nodpPIh5PA FNig8x78dPTncSuSKVM5sn/V80FEjDhvbJrozTnE2QOLFmTK7djFHwOqKp/JZqeIn/gOmB80b9P0 +h53dsUPl7uuWZECTxDoGLxKCMkCPX4ImM5pqx3gJJn6u57byo+LpLCcB2ZbPimobwTmKTKa4K/K SfPlyD0js+lnb0pIQ3xUTZboqlUV95Kma4OdOHyknxOm5jmEBeHSnN6UsPSMpsRNdphK+zY3fTOF PBfyCUQPGRfAuQJyQcUhQ9MGMevVVKNikwLQ0fq/FOsffcIZO36QdS9RNWQtVBR6DHNowdAa9MeL y+WplyJl8w== X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@quarantine1.mailspamprotection.com Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] MLX ConnectX-4 Discarding packets 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 Sender: "users" 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 >> >> >> Hope it helps. >> >> Cheers, >> Steffen Weise >> >> >>> Am 11.09.2021 um 10:56 schrieb Filip Janiszewski >>> : >>> >>> 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