Hi, All
Recently I found a big performance difference (~5Gbps vs. ~300Mbps by iperf3)
between two settings, which AF_PACKET related.
The testing topology:
Two servers are directly connected through 10G link; One is running VPP on the
10G NIC and AF_PACKET interface. And the iperf client (TCP) is sending packets
to the AF_PACKET interface. The other is running iperf server.
The startup.conf settings:
...
cpu {
main-core 18
corelist-workers 19,20,21,22
}
dev 0000:af:00.1 {
workers 0
# workers 1
}
....
The only difference of two testing is the "workers" setting, one (test1) is
setting workers to 0, the other (test2) is setting workers to 1. And I found
the iperf3 perf is ~5Gbps for test1, while only ~300Mbps for test2.
So I run "show run" to see what's happening and what's the difference.
Below is the output of "show run" that I only paste the working core.
Test1 (workers to 0)
Thread 1 vpp_wk_0 (lcore 19)
Time 1.2, average vectors/node 32.01, last 128 main loops .05 per node 1.00
vector rates in 4.7033e5, out 4.7033e5, drop 0.0000e0, punt 0.0000e0
Name State
Calls Vectors Suspends Clocks Vectors/Call
TenGigabitEthernetaf/0/1-outpu active 8134 528460
0 1.32e1 64.97
TenGigabitEthernetaf/0/1-tx active 8134
528460 0 1.32e2 64.97
af-packet-input interrupt wa 184542
528460 0 8.31e2 2.86
dpdk-input polling 038663
40390 0 5.87e3 .02
ethernet-input active 8134
528460 0 2.91e1 64.97
host-vpp0-output active 11729
40390 0 8.22e1 3.44
host-vpp0-tx active
11729 40390 0 4.37e4 3.44
ip4-input active
8134 528460 0 3.89e1 64.97
ip4-input-no-checksum active 11729
40390 0 2.03e2 3.44
ip4-lookup active
19863 568850 0 3.68e1 28.64
ip4-rewrite active
19863 568850 0 3.62e1 28.64
Test2 (workers to 1)
Thread 1 vpp_wk_0 (lcore 19)
Time 1.3, average vectors/node 256.00, last 128 main loops 0.00 per node 0.00
vector rates in 2.4971e4, out 2.4971e4, drop 0.0000e0, punt 0.0000e0
Name State Calls
Vectors Suspends Clocks Vectors/Call
TenGigabitEthernetaf/0/1-outpu active 130 33280
0 9.40e0 256.00
TenGigabitEthernetaf/0/1-tx active 130 33280
0 1.17e2 256.00
af-packet-input interrupt wa 8146
33280 0 6.34e2 4.09
ethernet-input active 130
33280 0 2.84e1 256.00
ip4-input active 130
33280 0 3.56e1 256.00
ip4-lookup active 130
33280 0 3.13e1 256.00
ip4-rewrite active 130
33280 0 2.97e1 256.00
unix-epoll-input polling 9317
0 0 4.62e5 0.00
---------------
Thread 2 vpp_wk_1 (lcore 20)
Time 1.3, average vectors/node 1.44, last 128 main loops 0.00 per node 0.00
vector rates in 5.3198e2, out 5.3198e2, drop 0.0000e0, punt 0.0000e0
Name State Calls
Vectors Suspends Clocks Vectors/Call
dpdk-input polling 18232975
709 0 2.29e6 0.00
host-vpp0-output active 492
709 0 1.91e2 1.44
host-vpp0-tx active 492
709 0 1.51e5 1.44
ip4-input-no-checksum active 492
709 0 3.20e2 1.44
ip4-lookup active 492
709 0 2.16e2 1.44
ip4-rewrite active 492
709 0 1.88e2 1.44
My observation is : For test1, the dpdk-input and af-packet-input are running
in the same core (core19), while for test2, dpdk-input (core 20) and
af-packet-input (core19) are running in the different core.
My question: Is it the reason for such huge performance difference? If yes,
seems like af-packet-input (by default) is handling by the first worker core.
Any optimization method to bind the af-packet-input and dpdk-input in the same
core?
My VPP config is simple:
set interface state TenGigabitEthernetaf/0/1 up
set interface ip address TenGigabitEthernetaf/0/1 10.1.1.1/24
set interface promiscuous on TenGigabitEthernetaf/0/1
create host-interface name vpp0
set interface state host-vpp0 up
set interface ip address host-vpp0 10.1.2.1/24
set interface promiscuous on host-vpp0
Many thanks.
Thx, Xuekun
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#11030): https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/message/11030
Mute This Topic: https://lists.fd.io/mt/27791437/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.fd.io/g/vpp-dev/unsub [[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
