DPDK patches and discussions
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Anuj Kalia <anujkaliaiitd@gmail.com>
To: Vladimir Medvedkin <medvedkinv@gmail.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] Could not achieve wire speed for 40GE with any DPDK version on XL710 NIC's
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 2015 10:22:35 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CADPSxAg4RoagimQ7QRqcDKbyQwsahLs8Bzjw=a0z--PUj8On-A@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CANDrEHk2qzmfgo=aw2gUJFDB+b3qOeR=y=nu5oKZcvT_3uWxgg@mail.gmail.com>

Vladimir,

Few possible fixes to your PCIe analysis (let me know if I'm wrong):
- ECRC is probably disabled (check using sudo lspci -vvv | grep
CGenEn-), so TLP header is 26 bytes
- Descriptor writeback can be batched using high value of WTHRESH,
which is what DPDK uses by default
- Read request contains full TLP header (26 bytes)

Assuming WTHRESH = 4, bytes transferred from NIC to host per packet =
26 + 64 (packet itself) +
(26 + 32) / 4 (batched descriptor writeback) +
(26 / 4) (read request for new descriptors) =
111 bytes / packet

This corresponds to 70.9 Mpps over PCIe 3.0 x8. Assuming 5% DLLP
overhead, rate = 67.4 Mpps

--Anuj



On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Vladimir Medvedkin <medvedkinv@gmail.com> wrote:
> In case with syn flood you should take into account return syn-ack traffic,
> which generates PCIe DLLP's from NIC to host, thus pcie bandwith exceeds
> faster. And don't forget about DLLP's generated by rx traffic, which
> saturates host-to-NIC bus.
>
> 2015-07-01 16:05 GMT+03:00 Pavel Odintsov <pavel.odintsov@gmail.com>:
>
>> Yes, Bruce, we understand this. But we are working with huge SYN
>> attacks processing and they are 64byte only :(
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 3:59 PM, Bruce Richardson
>> <bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jul 01, 2015 at 03:44:57PM +0300, Pavel Odintsov wrote:
>> >> Thanks for answer, Vladimir! So we need look for x16 NIC if we want
>> >> achieve 40GE line rate...
>> >>
>> > Note that this would only apply for your minimal i.e. 64-byte, packet
>> sizes.
>> > Once you go up to larger e.g. 128B packets, your PCI bandwidth
>> requirements
>> > are lower and you can easier achieve line rate.
>> >
>> > /Bruce
>> >
>> >> On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Vladimir Medvedkin <
>> medvedkinv@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> > Hi Pavel,
>> >> >
>> >> > Looks like you ran into pcie bottleneck. So let's calculate xl710 rx
>> only
>> >> > case.
>> >> > Assume we have 32byte descriptors (if we want more offload).
>> >> > DMA makes one pcie transaction with packet payload, one descriptor
>> writeback
>> >> > and one memory request for free descriptors for every 4 packets. For
>> >> > Transaction Layer Packet (TLP) there is 30 bytes overhead (4 PHY + 6
>> DLL +
>> >> > 16 header + 4 ECRC). So for 1 rx packet dma sends 30 + 64(packet
>> itself) +
>> >> > 30 + 32 (writeback descriptor) + (16 / 4) (read request for new
>> >> > descriptors). Note that we do not take into account PCIe ACK/NACK/FC
>> Update
>> >> > DLLP. So we have 160 bytes per packet. One lane PCIe 3.0 transmits 1
>> byte in
>> >> > 1 ns, so x8 transmits 8 bytes  in 1 ns. 1 packet transmits in 20 ns.
>> Thus
>> >> > in theory pcie 3.0 x8 may transfer not more than 50mpps.
>> >> > Correct me if I'm wrong.
>> >> >
>> >> > Regards,
>> >> > Vladimir
>> >> >
>> >> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sincerely yours, Pavel Odintsov
>>

  reply	other threads:[~2015-07-01 14:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-06-28 10:34 Pavel Odintsov
2015-06-28 23:35 ` Keunhong Lee
2015-06-29  6:59   ` Pavel Odintsov
2015-06-29 15:06     ` Keunhong Lee
2015-06-29 15:38       ` Andrew Theurer
2015-06-29 15:41         ` Pavel Odintsov
2015-07-01 12:06           ` Vladimir Medvedkin
2015-07-01 12:44             ` Pavel Odintsov
2015-07-01 12:59               ` Bruce Richardson
2015-07-01 13:05                 ` Pavel Odintsov
2015-07-01 13:40                   ` Vladimir Medvedkin
2015-07-01 14:22                     ` Anuj Kalia [this message]
2015-07-01 17:32                       ` Vladimir Medvedkin
2015-07-01 18:01                         ` Anuj Kalia
2015-07-03  8:35                           ` Pavel Odintsov

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='CADPSxAg4RoagimQ7QRqcDKbyQwsahLs8Bzjw=a0z--PUj8On-A@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=anujkaliaiitd@gmail.com \
    --cc=dev@dpdk.org \
    --cc=medvedkinv@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).