> Hi, all
>
> I just use ovs as a static router in my test case, ovs is ran in vagrant VM,
> ethernet interfaces uses virtio driver, I create two ovs bridges, each one
> adds one ethernet interface, two bridges are connected by patch port, only
> default openflow rule is there.
>
> table=0, priority=0 actions=NORMAL
> Bridge br-int
> Port patch-br-ex
> Interface patch-br-ex
> type: patch
> options: {peer=patch-br-int}
> Port br-int
> Interface br-int
> type: internal
> Port "dpdk0"
> Interface "dpdk0"
> type: dpdk
> options: {dpdk-devargs="0000:00:08.0"}
> Bridge br-ex
> Port "dpdk1"
> Interface "dpdk1"
> type: dpdk
> options: {dpdk-devargs="0000:00:09.0"}
> Port patch-br-int
> Interface patch-br-int
> type: patch
> options: {peer=patch-br-ex}
> Port br-ex
> Interface br-ex
> type: internal
>
> But when I run iperf to do performance benchmark, the result shocked me.
>
> For ovs nondpdk, the result is
>
> vagrant at client1:~$ iperf -t 60 -i 10 -c 192.168.230.101
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Client connecting to 192.168.230.101, TCP port 5001
> TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> [ 3] local 192.168.200.101 port 53900 connected with 192.168.230.101 port
> 5001
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.05 GBytes 905 Mbits/sec
> [ 3] 10.0-20.0 sec 1.02 GBytes 877 Mbits/sec
> [ 3] 20.0-30.0 sec 1.07 GBytes 922 Mbits/sec
> [ 3] 30.0-40.0 sec 1.08 GBytes 927 Mbits/sec
> [ 3] 40.0-50.0 sec 1.06 GBytes 914 Mbits/sec
> [ 3] 50.0-60.0 sec 1.07 GBytes 922 Mbits/sec
> [ 3] 0.0-60.0 sec 6.37 GBytes 911 Mbits/sec
>
> vagrant at client1:~$
>
> For ovs dpdk, the bandwidth is just about 45Mbits/sec, why? I really don’t
> understand what happened.
>
> vagrant at client1:~$ iperf -t 60 -i 10 -c 192.168.230.101
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> Client connecting to 192.168.230.101, TCP port 5001
> TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> [ 3] local 192.168.200.101 port 53908 connected with 192.168.230.101 port
> 5001
> [ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
> [ 3] 0.0-10.0 sec 54.6 MBytes 45.8 Mbits/sec
> [ 3] 10.0-20.0 sec 55.5 MBytes 46.6 Mbits/sec
> [ 3] 20.0-30.0 sec 52.5 MBytes 44.0 Mbits/sec
> [ 3] 30.0-40.0 sec 53.6 MBytes 45.0 Mbits/sec
> [ 3] 40.0-50.0 sec 54.0 MBytes 45.3 Mbits/sec
> [ 3] 50.0-60.0 sec 53.9 MBytes 45.2 Mbits/sec
> [ 3] 0.0-60.0 sec 324 MBytes 45.3 Mbits/sec
>
> vagrant at client1:~$
>
> By the way, I tried to pin physical cores to qemu processes which correspond
> to ovs pmd threads, but it hardly affects on performance.
>
> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
> P
> 16303 yangyi 20 0 9207120 209700 107500 R 99.9 0.1 63:02.37
> EMT-1 1
> 16304 yangyi 20 0 9207120 209700 107500 R 99.9 0.1 69:16.16
> EMT-2 2
Hi.
There might be a lot of reasons for a bad performance, but the most likely this
is just because of disabled offloading capabilities on the VM interface (TSO
mostly).
Try using UDP flow for testing. You should have almost same results for kernel
and DPDK in UDP case. Try:
# iperf -t 60 -i 10 -c 192.168.230.101 -u -b 10G -l 1460
The bottleneck in your setup is the tap interface that connects VM with the
host network, that is why I'm expecting similar results in both cases.
In case of kernel OVS, the tap interface on host will have TSO and checksum
offloading enabled so iperf will use huge 64K packets that will never be
segmented, since everything happens on the same host and all kernels (guest and
host)
by default has TSO and checksum offloading support.
While using OVS with DPDK in guest, tap interface on host will have no
TSO/chksum
offloading and the host kernel will have to split each 64K TCP packet into MTU
sized frames and re-calculate checksums for all the chunks. This significantly
slows down everything.
To partially mitigate the issue with TCP you could increase the MTU to 8K on
all your interfaces (all the host and gest interfaces ). Use 'mtu_request' to
set the MTU for DPDK ports. This should give a good performance boost in DPDK
case.
Best regards, Ilya Maximets.
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
d...@openvswitch.org
https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
