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 545FB45501 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 15:26:00 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mails.dpdk.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D33842E5A; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 15:25:59 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail-pg1-f178.google.com (mail-pg1-f178.google.com [209.85.215.178]) by mails.dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3502640660 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 15:24:57 +0200 (CEST) Received: by mail-pg1-f178.google.com with SMTP id 41be03b00d2f7-7152e097461so450903a12.1 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 06:24:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=domainhart-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1719408296; x=1720013096; darn=dpdk.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=u8dUlkUaqbAXu2gDlxhiFwSZzJMfSxfOmXs6BWmIDXs=; b=lqStaOv3f7TctpOe+4R9xlGShNM5h0NekRycJz+S4n8R+NnsCbYOxMWgcKSNDfDNQY Y7oe+jEQGqmlwX07Yx0J2oQYNsvUvlZyEIWUDnLFxaRWNn3NpkJE3br081hsnn0/8NxO vl0kq1fexReJ2cYCbiT9OUTClSzWDPSGuSEaEl1YU2pWU/jLSK4Tlgh0M96eDqovCFyi Opeb8tJEAP4CTG+SOyVc+s4BAasKzreQRX46fgIENyVbBpUI2ddW7AmFpXilnMmaDXKZ dxgefbSj89KpNMP53bQN9nlj/UaHnzOUfDoiSwNK17tKcwyke127sjNxp+Ok/kSEv6QJ xx0Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1719408296; x=1720013096; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=u8dUlkUaqbAXu2gDlxhiFwSZzJMfSxfOmXs6BWmIDXs=; b=NzEb9WplYqRGGvQlBAGsdepEESGzq4/qgyKtfmIp/RyZQo8AN/1mL2TsJtlkTqZ5nq JetCYRbs9fSa2AeZk1Bs5vLmW3jZNxytdr9CrWYw4ralN7E4Vyf73FtI+vMAGhBjVv7y KAxICjVxuVic03RSy/5peYD5pKoHxtuZypM8Y+GzIo+TnucjoV9urMd9cwTLDeyiaXMv H57dz9SN2F8LM8kv/8bRZ5aDE7mR/JTeahx6ygtNw367gVG++CLKwTZremTX2EYf3lww rLbWh7MbiqmrDMD6kjNisSGpQqKtBIiXC+4Wj25LaX3RjG8BxLhZPLPt9DuQh+R9qg6l gFFA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yyjhc8fx+yyhuaWALMuOvH+qKRPXfrrz6u1hG8LQ/E8S0GDdaKP 1zKZ87zEOL0U71TVr5y/iPhyPrn8sPOp2P5PFT630img6Wmor8Gh+8Zv+QEjbrW0BKsaO7rOXE+ YjXj3sBC+stpTAnhx5RwMuLEOYgLIfB6mfcFPmg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEpIKtbdL/DS8HG+z/WbfQx9aApgkmIgyJbgvg+z0ZtaXIiPNRk8YoQQyxWPWVQu6BPu8jCXk96YHnBBK7EUIs= X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:ac15:b0:2c8:4e46:92f6 with SMTP id 98e67ed59e1d1-2c8a232d64amr9430552a91.3.1719408296097; Wed, 26 Jun 2024 06:24:56 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Tony Hart Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 09:24:44 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Performance of CX7 with 'eth' pattern versus 'eth/ipv4' in hairpin To: Bing Zhao Cc: "users@dpdk.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 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 Hi Bing, Thanks for the quick reply. The results are... With a single hairpin queue I get approx the same rate for both patterns, ~54Gbps. I assume this is less than the RSS rates due to fewer queues? flow create 0 ingress group 1 pattern eth / end actions count / queue index 6 / end flow create 0 ingress group 1 pattern eth / ipv4 / end actions count / queue index 6 / end With the split ipv6/ipv4 I'm getting ~124Gbps flow create 0 ingress group 1 priority 1 pattern eth / ipv6 / end actions count / rss queues 6 7 8 9 end / end flow create 0 ingress group 1 priority 1 pattern eth / ipv4 / end actions count / rss queues 6 7 8 9 end / end testpmd> flow list 0 ID Group Prio Attr Rule 0 0 0 i-- =3D> JUMP 1 1 1 i-- ETH IPV6 =3D> COUNT RSS 2 1 1 i-- ETH IPV4 =3D> COUNT RSS On Wed, Jun 26, 2024 at 8:10=E2=80=AFAM Bing Zhao wrote: > > Hi Tony, > > Could you also try to test with: > 1. QUEUE action instead of RSS and check 1 queue performance. > 2. when trying to test IPv4 only case, try the following 3 commands with = this order - > flow create 0 ingress group 0 pattern end actions jump group 1 / = end > flow create 0 ingress group 1 pattern priority 1 eth / ipv6 / end= actions count / rss queues 6 7 8 9 end / end > flow create 0 ingress group 1 pattern priority 1 eth / ipv4 / end= actions count / rss queues 6 7 8 9 end / end > > BR. Bing > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Tony Hart > > Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2024 7:39 PM > > To: users@dpdk.org > > Subject: Performance of CX7 with 'eth' pattern versus 'eth/ipv4' in hai= rpin > > > > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments > > > > > > I'm using a CX7 and testing hairpin queues. The test traffic is entire= ly > > IPv4+UDP with distributed SIP,DIP pairs and received packets are u-turn= ed via > > hairpin in the CX7 (single 400G interface). > > > > I see different performance when I use a pattern of 'eth' versus 'eth/i= pv4' in > > the hairpin flow entry. From testing it seems that specifying just 'et= h' is > > sufficient to invoke RSS and 'eth/ipv4' > > should be equivalent since the traffic is all ipv4, but I'm getting ~10= 4Gbps for > > the 'eth' pattern and ~124Gbps for 'eth/ipv4' pattern. > > > > Any thoughts on why there is such a performance difference here? > > > > thanks > > tony > > > > This is the 'eth' pattern testpmd commands flow create 0 ingress group = 0 > > pattern end actions jump group 1 / end flow create 0 ingress group 1 pa= ttern > > eth / end actions count / rss queues 6 7 8 9 end / end > > > > The testpmd commands for 'eth/ipv4' > > flow create 0 ingress group 0 pattern end actions jump group 1 / end fl= ow > > create 0 ingress group 1 pattern eth / ipv4 / end actions count / rss q= ueues 6 7 > > 8 9 end / end > > > > > > This is the testpmd command line... > > dpdk-testpmd -l8-14 -a81:00.0,dv_flow_en=3D1 -- -i --nb-cores 6 --rxq 6= --txq 6 > > --port-topology loop --forward-mode=3Drxonly --hairpinq 4 --hairpin-mod= e > > 0x10 > > > > Versions > > mlnx-ofa_kernel-24.04-OFED.24.04.0.6.6.1.rhel9u4.x86_64 > > kmod-mlnx-ofa_kernel-24.04-OFED.24.04.0.6.6.1.rhel9u4.x86_64 > > mlnx-ofa_kernel-devel-24.04-OFED.24.04.0.6.6.1.rhel9u4.x86_64 > > ofed-scripts-24.04-OFED.24.04.0.6.6.x86_64 > > > > DPDK: v24.03 --=20 tony