From: Naoto MATSUMOTO <n-matsumoto@sakura.ad.jp>
To: Shinae Woo <shinae2012@gmail.com>
Cc: dev@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Performances are not scale with multiple ports
Date: Tue, 28 May 2013 11:30:05 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130528113005.5E6D.C42C3789@sakura.ad.jp> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CA+f=ZztBO=fTqSvj7n8SwKZUNz=fhOq1LcaFMJGJMRhy7xi41w@mail.gmail.com>
FYI: Disruptive IP Networking with Intel DPDK on Linux
http://slidesha.re/SeVFZo
On Tue, 28 May 2013 11:26:30 +0900
Shinae Woo <shinae2012@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello, all.
>
> I play the dpdk-1.2.3r1 with examples.
>
> But I can not achieve the line-rate packet receive performance,
> and the performance is not scale with multiple ports.
>
> For example, in example l2fwd, I have tested two cases with 2 ports, and 4
> ports,
> using belowed command line each
>
> ./build/l2fwd -cf -n3 -- -p3
> ./build/l2fwd -cf -n3 -- -pf
>
> But both cases, the aggregated performance are not scale.
>
> == experiments environments ==
> - Two Intel 82599 NICs (total 4 ports)
> - Intel Xeon X5690 @ 3.47GHz * 2 (total 12 cores)
> - 1024 * 2MB hugepages
> - Linux 2.6.38-15-server
> - Each ports receiving 10Gbps of traffic of 64 bytes packets, 14.88Mpps.
>
> *1. Packet forwarding performance*
>
> In 2 ports case, receive performance is 13Mpps,
> In 4 ports case, not 26Mbps, only 16.8Mpps.
>
> Port statistics ====================================
> Statistics for port 0 ------------------------------
> Packets sent: 4292256
> Packets received: 6517396
> Packets dropped: 2224776
> Statistics for port 1 ------------------------------
> Packets sent: 4291840
> Packets received: 6517044
> Packets dropped: 2225556
> Aggregate statistics ===============================
> Total packets sent: 8584128
> Total packets received: 13034472
> Total packets dropped: 4450332
> ====================================================
>
> Port statistics ====================================
> Statistics for port 0 ------------------------------
> Packets sent: 1784064
> Packets received: 2632700
> Packets dropped: 848128
> Statistics for port 1 ------------------------------
> Packets sent: 1784104
> Packets received: 2632196
> Packets dropped: 848596
> Statistics for port 2 ------------------------------
> Packets sent: 3587616
> Packets received: 5816344
> Packets dropped: 2200176
> Statistics for port 3 ------------------------------
> Packets sent: 3587712
> Packets received: 5787848
> Packets dropped: 2228684
> Aggregate statistics ===============================
> Total packets sent: 10743560
> Total packets received: 16869152
> Total packets dropped: 6125608
> ====================================================
>
> *2. Packet receiving performance*
> I fix the codes for only receiving packets (not forwarding),
> the performance is still not scalable as each 13.3Mpps, 18Mpps.
>
> Port statistics ====================================
> Statistics for port 0 ------------------------------
> Packets sent: 0
> Packets received: 6678860
> Packets dropped: 0
> Statistics for port 1 ------------------------------
> Packets sent: 0
> Packets received: 6646120
> Packets dropped: 0
> Aggregate statistics ===============================
> Total packets sent: 0
> Total packets received: 13325012
> Total packets dropped: 0
> ====================================================
>
> Port statistics ====================================
> Statistics for port 0 ------------------------------
> Packets sent: 0
> Packets received: 3129624
> Packets dropped: 0
> Statistics for port 1 ------------------------------
> Packets sent: 0
> Packets received: 3131292
> Packets dropped: 0
> Statistics for port 2 ------------------------------
> Packets sent: 0
> Packets received: 6260908
> Packets dropped: 0
> Statistics for port 3 ------------------------------
> Packets sent: 0
> Packets received: 6238764
> Packets dropped: 0
> Aggregate statistics ===============================
> Total packets sent: 0
> Total packets received: 18760640
> Total packets dropped: 0
> ====================================================
>
> The question is that
> 1. How I can achieve each port receiving full 14.88Mpps ?
> What might be the bottleneck in current environment?
> 2. Why the performance using multiple ports is not scale?
> I guess doubling ports shows the doubling the receiving performance,
> but it shows not. I am curious about what is limiting the packet
> receivng performance.
>
> Thanks,
> Shinae
--
SAKURA Internet Inc. / Senior Researcher
Naoto MATSUMOTO <n-matsumoto@sakura.ad.jp>
SAKURA Internet Research Center <http://research.sakura.ad.jp/>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-28 2:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-28 2:26 Shinae Woo
2013-05-28 2:30 ` Naoto MATSUMOTO [this message]
2013-05-28 3:05 ` Shinae Woo
2013-05-28 3:15 ` Emre Eraltan
2013-05-28 3:29 ` Stephen Hemminger
2013-05-28 4:00 ` Shinae Woo
2013-05-29 3:09 ` Naoto MATSUMOTO
2013-05-28 9:22 ` 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=20130528113005.5E6D.C42C3789@sakura.ad.jp \
--to=n-matsumoto@sakura.ad.jp \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=shinae2012@gmail.com \
/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).