From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753084Ab0I3SDK (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Sep 2010 14:03:10 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f46.google.com ([209.85.161.46]:62839 "EHLO mail-fx0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751610Ab0I3SDJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Sep 2010 14:03:09 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=subject:from:to:cc:in-reply-to:references:content-type:date :message-id:mime-version:x-mailer:content-transfer-encoding; b=UF8q/u8YNxtnTM4WclLpLNYJFTFsoqiwvF399bVOqsZUYVEF9dikCwSsQ9rIY+OIMd Ht1BbUg+LzXgPHCSISTXZCrrJZyoUFoolBgfYCdLa5Y8wePG7a+AyaOl5uVIVC5SXQHA a2igEX2Sy3mAzbX2pqC4oD2FfReypN07YqKl8= Subject: Re: Packet time delays on multi-core systems From: Eric Dumazet To: Alexey Vlasov Cc: Linux Kernel Mailing List , netdev In-Reply-To: <20100930173732.GB4094@beaver.vrungel.ru> References: <20100929191851.GC86786@beaver.vrungel.ru> <1285796721.5211.156.camel@edumazet-laptop> <20100930062419.GD86786@beaver.vrungel.ru> <1285828432.5211.812.camel@edumazet-laptop> <20100930122321.GA1575@beaver.vrungel.ru> <1285850669.2615.426.camel@edumazet-laptop> <20100930173732.GB4094@beaver.vrungel.ru> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 20:03:02 +0200 Message-ID: <1285869782.2615.920.camel@edumazet-laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.30.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Le jeudi 30 septembre 2010 à 21:37 +0400, Alexey Vlasov a écrit : > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 02:44:29PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > Le jeudi 30 septembre 2010 ?? 16:23 +0400, Alexey Vlasov a ??crit : > > > On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 08:33:52AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > > > Le jeudi 30 septembre 2010 ?? 10:24 +0400, Alexey Vlasov a ??crit : > > > > > Here I found some dude with the same problem: > > > > > http://lkml.org/lkml/2010/7/9/340 > > > > > > Well I put interrups from NIC, namely tx/rx query, to different > > > processors and got normal pings by adding LOG rule. > > > > > > I also found that overruns is constantly growing, I don't know if these are connected. > > > RX packets:2831439546 errors:0 dropped:134726 overruns:947671733 frame:0 > > > TX packets:2880849825 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0 > > > > > Too early to be happy, concerning one rule- the situation got better, but still > there are some time delays. But adding one more rule: > -A INPUT -p all -m state --state INVALID -j LOG --log-prefix > "ipsec:IN-INVALID " > it got totally wrecked: > ... > 64 bytes from (10.0.2.17): icmp_seq=24 ttl=64 time=0.342 ms > 64 bytes from (10.0.2.17): icmp_seq=25 ttl=64 time=1868 ms > 64 bytes from (10.0.2.17): icmp_seq=26 ttl=64 time=1448 ms > 64 bytes from (10.0.2.17): icmp_seq=27 ttl=64 time=447 ms > 64 bytes from (10.0.2.17): icmp_seq=28 ttl=64 time=0.196 ms > ... > 100 packets transmitted, 100 received, 0% packet loss, time 99990ms > rtt min/avg/max/mdev = 0.108/39.068/1868.663/237.507 ms, pipe 2 > > # iptables -L -v -n > Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 601K packets, 475M bytes) > pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination > 275 11096 LOG all -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 state INVALID LOG flags 0 level 4 prefix `ipsec:IN-INVALID ' > > Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 0 packets, 0 bytes) > pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination > > Chain OUTPUT (policy ACCEPT 529K packets, 561M bytes) > pkts bytes target prot opt in out source destination > 13979 839K LOG tcp -- * * 0.0.0.0/0 0.0.0.0/0 tcp dpt:80 flags:0x17/0x02 LOG flags 8 level 4 prefix `ipsec:SYN-OUTPUT-DROP ' > > > > Here goes the typical distribution of interrups on new servers: > > > CPU0 CPU1 CPU2 CPU3 ... CPU23 > > > 752: 11 0 0 0 ... 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth0 > > > 753: 2799366721 0 0 0 ... 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth0-rx3 > > > 754: 2821840553 0 0 0 ... 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth0-rx2 > > > 755: 2786117044 0 0 0 ... 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth0-rx1 > > > 756: 2896099336 0 0 0 ... 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth0-rx0 > > > 757: 1808404680 0 0 0 ... 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth0-tx3 > > > 758: 1797855130 0 0 0 ... 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth0-tx2 > > > 759: 1807222032 0 0 0 ... 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth0-tx1 > > > 760: 1820309360 0 0 0 ... 0 PCI-MSI-edge eth0-tx0 > > > > > > > echo 01 >/proc/irq/*/eth0-rx0/../smp_affinity > > echo 02 >/proc/irq/*/eth0-rx1/../smp_affinity > > echo 04 >/proc/irq/*/eth0-rx2/../smp_affinity > > echo 08 >/proc/irq/*/eth0-rx3/../smp_affinity > > > > > > cat /proc/irq/*/eth0-rx0/../smp_affinity > > cat /proc/irq/*/eth0-rx1/../smp_affinity > > cat /proc/irq/*/eth0-rx2/../smp_affinity > > cat /proc/irq/*/eth0-rx3/../smp_affinity > > The last test were made already concerning such rx queue binding: > # cat /proc/irq/60/smp_affinity > 001000 > # cat /proc/irq/61/smp_affinity > 010000 > # cat /proc/irq/62/smp_affinity > 080000 > # cat /proc/irq/63/smp_affinity > 800000 > Why 60, 61, 62, 63 ? This should be 753, 754, 755, 756 > Now ksoftirqd eats not only one processor but all oness where I assigned the IRQs. > > > > On the old ones: > > > CPU0 CPU1 CPU2 ... CPU8 > > > 502: 522320256 522384039 522327386 ... 522380267 PCI-MSI-edge eth0 > > > > > > > What network driver is it (newbox), was it (old box) ? > > newbox: > 01:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82575EB Gigabit Network > Connection (rev 02) > driver: igb > version: 1.3.16-k2 > firmware-version: 2.1-0 > bus-info: 0000:01:00.0 > > oldbox: > 05:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 80003ES2LAN Gigabit > Ethernet Controller (Copper) (rev 01) > driver: e1000e > version: 0.3.3.3-k6 > firmware-version: 1.0-0 > bus-info: 0000:05:00.0 >