From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qc0-f177.google.com (mail-qc0-f177.google.com [209.85.216.177]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3B4D4ADE6 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 16:16:19 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-qc0-f177.google.com with SMTP id s11so8922500qcv.8 for ; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 07:16:18 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=xdel.ru; s=google; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-type; bh=0W0vmlXXSFpnuUE+WJdVM6ot5XNoa8MU2mPTMJ9u9fM=; b=O8Ssv70IlQT8mO1OixYxd0DAaMEz+fWJiHy5kWFrYS+DeCT2x+suH3hvlVOiTjaZcR A1/P9No3wqFrTW7ovNvIYLTR73E83BY8AyWhJDOnREt46an7AI4cuw9wBMJlJ6Kj5S7t HCoOZ5u/zuogNRP9P1GdZMKWYkpN8C5WVj4NY= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=0W0vmlXXSFpnuUE+WJdVM6ot5XNoa8MU2mPTMJ9u9fM=; b=eCp7U0HS41pDZvxzlwS02NMUoqjAcMUKHb54VR0VLOFc2MkNbRc6OTgaydHkuRYPEE 51rNZnMhQHl2Jo7qOLBUXaJw6FiHpAs5+6pL24nBeAAXXD0aSSCgpfOn0jiG3M2TRc2J AfKCt6BWSkAbVz1I+xoOukPDjAwhY5n4mV1VTuVXY6xagb/YU0+NMgk5T92gXYbNamgR Mf55LGCS8yG53ZEJ6BArhxYMJfzVgPDJ1rezIhv4GHEB3zbAUIsMZaSHh14KhodnMsK2 S29XcXT2PysTTz/kJEy7+wqCOdQpkXL9JFHIbEKazsKYG5sAdQ1TdYwtjzhds4V7sXpb MAMw== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlzBAPxIaqGA8rU8dqdFmljWXQTnNfunyNAGWOXfp4HdtIvPFScFiOdFeD5OJcRL7od+c8I X-Received: by 10.140.16.177 with SMTP id 46mr10894093qgb.22.1423754178740; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 07:16:18 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.140.17.83 with HTTP; Thu, 12 Feb 2015 07:15:58 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: From: Andrey Korolyov Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 19:15:58 +0400 Message-ID: To: "Traynor, Kevin" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" , "discuss@openvswitch.org" Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Packet drops during non-exhaustive flood with OVS and 1.8.0 X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2015 15:16:19 -0000 On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 6:05 PM, Traynor, Kevin wrote: >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Andrey Korolyov [mailto:andrey@xdel.ru] >> Sent: Tuesday, February 3, 2015 5:21 PM >> To: Traynor, Kevin >> Cc: dev@dpdk.org; discuss@openvswitch.org >> Subject: Re: Packet drops during non-exhaustive flood with OVS and 1.8.0 >> >> > These patches are to enable DPDK 1.8 only. What 'bulk processing' are you referring to? >> > By default there is a batch size of 192 in netdev-dpdk for rx from the NIC - the linked >> > patch doesn't change this, just the DPDK version. >> >> Sorry, I referred the wrong part there: bulk transmission, which is >> clearly not involved in my case. The idea was that the conditionally >> enabling prefetch for rx queues (BULK_ALLOC) may help somehow, but >> it`s probably will mask issue instead of solving it directly. By my >> understanding, strict drop rule should have a zero impact on a main >> ovs thread (and this is true) and work just fine with a line rate >> (this is not). > > I've set a similar drop rule and I'm seeing the first packet drops occurring > at 13.9 mpps for 64 byte pkts. I'm not sure if there is a config that can be > changed or if it just the cost of the emc/lookups > Do you mind to compare this case with forward to the dummy port (ifconfig dummy0; ovs-vsctl add-port br0 dummy0; ip link set dev dummy0 up; flush rule table; create a single forward rule; start an attack)? As I mentioned there are no signs of syscall congestion for a drop or dpdk-dpdk forward case.