From: Alex Kiselev <alex@therouter.net>
To: "Singh, Jasvinder" <jasvinder.singh@intel.com>
Cc: users@dpdk.org, "Dumitrescu,
Cristian" <cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com>,
"Dharmappa, Savinay" <savinay.dharmappa@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-users] scheduler issue
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 23:36:48 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <65137190595f45680abab47fa4cb2873@therouter.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7909ed9ded69f36b262ff151244c8b0d@therouter.net>
On 2020-12-11 23:27, Alex Kiselev wrote:
> On 2020-12-11 23:06, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
>>> On 11 Dec 2020, at 21:29, Alex Kiselev <alex@therouter.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2020-12-08 14:24, Singh, Jasvinder wrote:
>>>> <snip>
>>>>> > [JS] now, returning to 1 mbps pipes situation, try reducing tc period
>>>>> > first at subport and then at pipe level, if that help in getting even
>>>>> > traffic across low bandwidth pipes.
>>>>> reducing subport tc from 10 to 5 period also solved the problem
>>>>> with 1
>>>>> Mbit/s pipes.
>>>>> so, my second problem has been solved,
>>>>> but the first one with some of low bandwidth pipes stop
>>>>> transmitting still
>>>>> remains.
>>>> I see, try removing "pkt_len <= pipe_tc_ov_credits" condition in the
>>>> grinder_credits_check() code for oversubscription case, instead use
>>>> this pkt_len <= pipe_tc_credits + pipe_tc_ov_credits;
>>>
>>> if I do what you suggest, I will get this code
>>>
>>> enough_credits = (pkt_len <= subport_tb_credits) &&
>>> (pkt_len <= subport_tc_credits) &&
>>> (pkt_len <= pipe_tb_credits) &&
>>> (pkt_len <= pipe_tc_credits) &&
>>> (pkt_len <= pipe_tc_credits + pipe_tc_ov_credits);
>>>
>>> And this doesn't make sense since if condition pkt_len <=
>>> pipe_tc_credits is true
>>> then condition (pkt_len <= pipe_tc_credits + pipe_tc_ov_credits) is
>>> also always true.
>>
>> [JS] my suggestion is to remove“pkt_len <= pipe_tc_credits“, “ pkt_len
>> <= pipe_tc_ov_credits”and use only “pkt_len <= pipe_tc_credits +
>> pipe_tc_ov_credits“
>> While keeping tc_ov flag on.
>>
>>> Your suggestion just turns off TC_OV feature.
>
> I don't see your point.
>
> This new suggestion will also effectively turn off the TC_OV feature
> since
> the only effect of enabling TC_OV is adding additional condition
> pkt_len <= pipe_tc_ov_credits
> which doesn't allow a pipe to spend more resources than it should.
> And in the case of support congestion a pipe should spent less than
> %100 of pipe's maximum rate.
>
> And you suggest to allow pipe to spend 100% of it's rate plus some
> extra.
> I guess effect of this would even more unfair support's bandwidth
> distibution.
>
> Btw, a pipe might stop transmitting even when there is no congestion
> at a subport.
While I am trying to find a cause of this
I want to make life of my client's sysadmins a little bit easier
by offering them a way to reset a subport or an entire port in order
to restore the connectivity when they detect a problematic pipe.
Any hints how to do that?
Thanks.
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >>> rcv 0 rx rate 7324160 nb pkts 5722
>>>>> >>> rcv 1 rx rate 7281920 nb pkts 5689
>>>>> >>> rcv 2 rx rate 7226880 nb pkts 5646
>>>>> >>> rcv 3 rx rate 7124480 nb pkts 5566
>>>>> >>> rcv 4 rx rate 7324160 nb pkts 5722
>>>>> >>> rcv 5 rx rate 7271680 nb pkts 5681
>>>>> >>> rcv 6 rx rate 7188480 nb pkts 5616
>>>>> >>> rcv 7 rx rate 7150080 nb pkts 5586
>>>>> >>> rcv 8 rx rate 7328000 nb pkts 5725
>>>>> >>> rcv 9 rx rate 7249920 nb pkts 5664
>>>>> >>> rcv 10 rx rate 7188480 nb pkts 5616 rcv 11 rx rate 7179520 nb pkts
>>>>> >>> 5609 rcv 12 rx rate 7324160 nb pkts 5722 rcv 13 rx rate 7208960 nb
>>>>> >>> pkts 5632 rcv 14 rx rate 7152640 nb pkts 5588 rcv 15 rx rate
>>>>> >>> 7127040 nb pkts 5568 rcv 16 rx rate 7303680 nb pkts 5706 ....
>>>>> >>> rcv 587 rx rate 2406400 nb pkts 1880 rcv 588 rx rate 2406400 nb pkts
>>>>> >>> 1880 rcv 589 rx rate 2406400 nb pkts 1880 rcv 590 rx rate 2406400 nb
>>>>> >>> pkts 1880 rcv 591 rx rate 2406400 nb pkts 1880 rcv 592 rx rate
>>>>> >>> 2398720 nb pkts 1874 rcv 593 rx rate 2400000 nb pkts 1875 rcv 594 rx
>>>>> >>> rate 2400000 nb pkts 1875 rcv 595 rx rate 2400000 nb pkts 1875 rcv
>>>>> >>> 596 rx rate 2401280 nb pkts 1876 rcv 597 rx rate 2401280 nb pkts
>>>>> >>> 1876 rcv 598 rx rate 2401280 nb pkts 1876 rcv 599 rx rate 2402560 nb
>>>>> >>> pkts 1877 rx rate sum 3156416000
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>> ... despite that there is _NO_ congestion...
>>>>> >>>>> congestion at the subport or pipe.
>>>>> >>>>>> And the subport !! doesn't use about 42 mbit/s of available
>>>>> >>>>>> bandwidth.
>>>>> >>>>>> The only difference is those test configurations is TC of
>>>>> >>>>>> generated traffic.
>>>>> >>>>>> Test 1 uses TC 1 while test 2 uses TC 3 (which is use TC_OV
>>>>> >>>>>> function).
>>>>> >>>>>> So, enabling TC_OV changes the results dramatically.
>>>>> >>>>>> ##
>>>>> >>>>>> ## test1
>>>>> >>>>>> ##
>>>>> >>>>>> hqos add profile 7 rate 2 M size 1000000 tc period 40
>>>>> >>>>>> # qos test port
>>>>> >>>>>> hqos add port 1 rate 10 G mtu 1522 frame overhead 24 queue sizes
>>>>> >>>>>> 64 64 64 64
>>>>> >>>>>> hqos add port 1 subport 0 rate 300 M size 1000000 tc period 10
>>>>> >>>>>> hqos add port 1 subport 0 pipes 2000 profile 7 hqos add port 1
>>>>> >>>>>> subport 0 pipes 200 profile 23 hqos set port 1 lcore 3 port 1
>>>>> >>>>>> subport rate 300 M number of tx flows 300 generator tx rate 1M TC
>>>>> >>>>>> 1 ...
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 284 rx rate 995840 nb pkts 778 rcv 285 rx rate 995840 nb
>>>>> >>>>>> pkts 778 rcv 286 rx rate 995840 nb pkts 778 rcv 287 rx rate
>>>>> >>>>>> 995840 nb pkts 778 rcv 288 rx rate 995840 nb pkts 778 rcv 289
>>>>> >>>>>> rx rate 995840 nb pkts 778 rcv 290 rx rate 995840 nb pkts 778
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 291 rx rate 995840 nb pkts 778 rcv 292 rx rate 995840 nb
>>>>> >>>>>> pkts 778 rcv 293 rx rate 995840 nb pkts 778 rcv 294 rx rate
>>>>> >>>>>> 995840 nb pkts 778 ...
>>>>> >>>>>> sum pipe's rx rate is 298 494 720 OK.
>>>>> >>>>>> The subport rate is equally distributed to 300 pipes.
>>>>> >>>>>> ##
>>>>> >>>>>> ## test 2
>>>>> >>>>>> ##
>>>>> >>>>>> hqos add profile 7 rate 2 M size 1000000 tc period 40
>>>>> >>>>>> # qos test port
>>>>> >>>>>> hqos add port 1 rate 10 G mtu 1522 frame overhead 24 queue sizes
>>>>> >>>>>> 64 64 64 64
>>>>> >>>>>> hqos add port 1 subport 0 rate 300 M size 1000000 tc period 10
>>>>> >>>>>> hqos add port 1 subport 0 pipes 2000 profile 7 hqos add port 1
>>>>> >>>>>> subport 0 pipes 200 profile 23 hqos set port 1 lcore 3 port 1
>>>>> >>>>>> subport rate 300 M number of tx flows 300 generator tx rate 1M TC
>>>>> >>>>>> 3
>>>>> >>>>>> h5 ~ # rcli sh qos rcv
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 0 rx rate 875520 nb pkts 684
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 1 rx rate 856320 nb pkts 669
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 2 rx rate 849920 nb pkts 664
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 3 rx rate 853760 nb pkts 667
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 4 rx rate 867840 nb pkts 678
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 5 rx rate 844800 nb pkts 660
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 6 rx rate 852480 nb pkts 666
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 7 rx rate 855040 nb pkts 668
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 8 rx rate 865280 nb pkts 676
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 9 rx rate 846080 nb pkts 661
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 10 rx rate 858880 nb pkts 671 rcv 11 rx rate 870400 nb
>>>>> >>>>>> pkts 680 rcv 12 rx rate 864000 nb pkts 675 rcv 13 rx rate
>>>>> >>>>>> 852480 nb pkts 666 rcv 14 rx rate 855040 nb pkts 668 rcv 15
>>>>> >>>>>> rx rate 857600 nb pkts 670 rcv 16 rx rate 864000 nb pkts 675
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 17 rx rate 866560 nb pkts 677 rcv 18 rx rate 865280 nb
>>>>> >>>>>> pkts 676 rcv 19 rx rate 858880 nb pkts 671 rcv 20 rx rate
>>>>> >>>>>> 856320 nb pkts 669 rcv 21 rx rate 864000 nb pkts 675 rcv 22
>>>>> >>>>>> rx rate 869120 nb pkts 679 rcv 23 rx rate 856320 nb pkts 669
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 24 rx rate 862720 nb pkts 674 rcv 25 rx rate 865280 nb
>>>>> >>>>>> pkts 676 rcv 26 rx rate 867840 nb pkts 678 rcv 27 rx rate
>>>>> >>>>>> 870400 nb pkts 680 rcv 28 rx rate 860160 nb pkts 672 rcv 29
>>>>> >>>>>> rx rate 870400 nb pkts 680 rcv 30 rx rate 869120 nb pkts 679
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 31 rx rate 870400 nb pkts 680 rcv 32 rx rate 858880 nb
>>>>> >>>>>> pkts 671 rcv 33 rx rate 858880 nb pkts 671 rcv 34 rx rate
>>>>> >>>>>> 852480 nb pkts 666 rcv 35 rx rate 874240 nb pkts 683 rcv 36
>>>>> >>>>>> rx rate 855040 nb pkts 668 rcv 37 rx rate 853760 nb pkts 667
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 38 rx rate 869120 nb pkts 679 rcv 39 rx rate 885760 nb
>>>>> >>>>>> pkts 692 rcv 40 rx rate 861440 nb pkts 673 rcv 41 rx rate
>>>>> >>>>>> 852480 nb pkts 666 rcv 42 rx rate 871680 nb pkts 681 ...
>>>>> >>>>>> ...
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 288 rx rate 766720 nb pkts 599 rcv 289 rx rate 766720 nb
>>>>> >>>>>> pkts 599 rcv 290 rx rate 766720 nb pkts 599 rcv 291 rx rate
>>>>> >>>>>> 766720 nb pkts 599 rcv 292 rx rate 762880 nb pkts 596 rcv 293
>>>>> >>>>>> rx rate 762880 nb pkts 596 rcv 294 rx rate 762880 nb pkts 596
>>>>> >>>>>> rcv 295 rx rate 760320 nb pkts 594 rcv 296 rx rate 604160 nb
>>>>> >>>>>> pkts 472 rcv 297 rx rate 604160 nb pkts 472 rcv 298 rx rate
>>>>> >>>>>> 604160 nb pkts 472 rcv 299 rx rate 604160 nb pkts 472 rx rate
>>>>> >>>>>> sum 258839040 FAILED.
>>>>> >>>>>> The subport rate is distributed NOT equally between 300 pipes.
>>>>> >>>>>> Some subport bandwith (about 42) is not being used!
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-11 22:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-11-24 13:34 Alex Kiselev
2020-11-25 15:04 ` Alex Kiselev
2020-11-27 12:11 ` Alex Kiselev
2020-12-07 10:00 ` Singh, Jasvinder
2020-12-07 10:46 ` Alex Kiselev
2020-12-07 11:32 ` Singh, Jasvinder
2020-12-07 12:29 ` Alex Kiselev
2020-12-07 16:49 ` Alex Kiselev
2020-12-07 17:31 ` Singh, Jasvinder
2020-12-07 17:45 ` Alex Kiselev
[not found] ` <49019BC8-DDA6-4B39-B395-2A68E91AB424@intel.com>
[not found] ` <226b13286c876e69ad40a65858131b66@therouter.net>
[not found] ` <4536a02973015dc8049834635f145a19@therouter.net>
[not found] ` <f9a27b6493ae1e1e2850a3b459ab9d33@therouter.net>
[not found] ` <B8241A33-0927-4411-A340-9DD0BEE07968@intel.com>
[not found] ` <e6a0429dc4a1a33861a066e3401e85b6@therouter.net>
2020-12-07 22:16 ` Alex Kiselev
2020-12-07 22:32 ` Singh, Jasvinder
2020-12-08 10:52 ` Alex Kiselev
2020-12-08 13:24 ` Singh, Jasvinder
2020-12-09 13:41 ` Alex Kiselev
2020-12-10 10:29 ` Singh, Jasvinder
2020-12-11 21:29 ` Alex Kiselev
2020-12-11 22:06 ` Singh, Jasvinder
2020-12-11 22:27 ` Alex Kiselev
2020-12-11 22:36 ` Alex Kiselev [this message]
2020-12-11 22:55 ` Singh, Jasvinder
2020-12-11 23:36 ` Alex Kiselev
2020-12-12 0:20 ` Singh, Jasvinder
2020-12-12 0:45 ` Alex Kiselev
2020-12-12 0:54 ` Alex Kiselev
2020-12-12 1:45 ` Alex Kiselev
2020-12-12 10:22 ` Singh, Jasvinder
2020-12-12 10:46 ` Alex Kiselev
2020-12-12 17:19 ` Alex Kiselev
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=65137190595f45680abab47fa4cb2873@therouter.net \
--to=alex@therouter.net \
--cc=cristian.dumitrescu@intel.com \
--cc=jasvinder.singh@intel.com \
--cc=savinay.dharmappa@intel.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).