Mailing List Archive

Fwd: Query on software using Pfring 7.5 and i40e driver
Hi Alfredo,
Please provide an update on this !
Regards,
Chandrika



Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

> From: Chandrika Gautam <chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com>
> Date: September 9, 2019 at 8:47:55 AM GMT+5:30
> To: ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it
> Subject: Re: [Ntop-misc] Query on software using Pfring 7.5 and i40e driver
>
> Hi Alfredo,
>
> Have you been able to look at this further ???
>
> Any feedback on ksoftirq reaching 100% continuously.
>
> Regards,
> Chandrika
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Sep 4, 2019, at 8:11 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano <cardigliano@ntop.org> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Chandrika
>> this is definitely strange: please note that with standard drivers interrupts
>> are not controlled by PF_RING as they are managed by the driver itself..
>> this is interesting, I will take a look asap.
>>
>> Alfredo
>>
>>> On 4 Sep 2019, at 14:15, Chandrika Gautam <chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> That’s the secondary issue which we will focus later on.
>>>
>>> So let me rephrase the problem statements -
>>> 1. This does not involve zc! Problem 1- When we are using our software integrated with pfring 7.5.0, we do not see counters incremented in cat /proc/interrupts/ for the interface from which we are reading the packets.
>>> We are using standard i40e. driver on rhel 7.6 and have reduced the number of queues of this card interfaces to 4 and set the smp affinity explicitly.
>>> Second problem - we can see ksoftirq for the assigned cores taking 100% of CPU due to which we are observing drop at the interface as well.
>>> When we run tcpdump on the same interface, we can see the interrupts counts incrementing using above same command.
>>>
>>> 2- above observation is same when we deploy zc compiled i40e driver ;
>>>
>>> Will there be no interrupts with i40e driver when used with pf_ring ??
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Chandrika
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>>> On Sep 4, 2019, at 1:04 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano <cardigliano@ntop.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Chandrika
>>>> are you observing better performance with ixgbe? Please note that ixgbe has a bigger buffer in the card,
>>>> this could explain better performance in case of high traffic rate (what is the pps rate in this case?)
>>>>
>>>> Alfredo
>>>>
>>>>> On 28 Aug 2019, at 12:56, Chandrika Gautam <chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Alfredo,
>>>>>
>>>>> Interrupts are not seen either with standard driver or with the zc compiled i40e driver as well.
>>>>>
>>>>> What we do in our application is -
>>>>> We load zc compiled i40e driver and put a zc license on that interface but we do not open device using zc: prefix.
>>>>> Using this we have observed better performAnce in our application when used with ixgbe driver.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Chandrika
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Aug 28, 2019, at 12:58 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano <cardigliano@ntop.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Chandrika
>>>>>> are you using the i40e-zc driver or the standard driver?
>>>>>> Please note that ZC enables interrupts only when required for performance reason,
>>>>>> for example some libpcap-based applications require interrupts as they use poll/select,
>>>>>> instead many pf_ring-based application do not use interrupts at all (they do active polling).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alfredo
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 28 Aug 2019, at 08:59, Chandrika Gautam <chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Team,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We have compiled our software with PF_RING 7.5.0 which reads from an interface on i40e driver.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Whenever we start our software, it process the traffic received on the interface but no interrupts are seen.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Whenever we start tcpdump on the same interface, then interrupts can be seen.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can you please help to validate this behavior. Is it expected behavior ? We need to validate that the interrupts are coming on the cores to which we have set the affnity.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Chandrika
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>>>>>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it
>>>>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>>>>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it
>>>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>>>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it
>>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it
>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it
>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it
>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
Re: Query on software using Pfring 7.5 and i40e driver [ In reply to ]
Hi Afredo,

Can you please help which card you feel will give the same performance as intel 82599 with pfring to process 4-5 gbps of traffic.
We are observing lots of drops at interface for x710 card while processing 2-3 gbps of traffic.

Please note that intel 82599 is end of life.

Regards,
Chandrika

Sent from my iPhone

> On Sep 10, 2019, at 11:41 AM, Chandrika Gautam <chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Alfredo,
> Please provide an update on this !
> Regards,
> Chandrika
>
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: Chandrika Gautam <chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com>
>> Date: September 9, 2019 at 8:47:55 AM GMT+5:30
>> To: ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it
>> Subject: Re: [Ntop-misc] Query on software using Pfring 7.5 and i40e driver
>>
>> Hi Alfredo,
>>
>> Have you been able to look at this further ???
>>
>> Any feedback on ksoftirq reaching 100% continuously.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Chandrika
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>>> On Sep 4, 2019, at 8:11 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano <cardigliano@ntop.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Chandrika
>>> this is definitely strange: please note that with standard drivers interrupts
>>> are not controlled by PF_RING as they are managed by the driver itself..
>>> this is interesting, I will take a look asap.
>>>
>>> Alfredo
>>>
>>>> On 4 Sep 2019, at 14:15, Chandrika Gautam <chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> That’s the secondary issue which we will focus later on.
>>>>
>>>> So let me rephrase the problem statements -
>>>> 1. This does not involve zc! Problem 1- When we are using our software integrated with pfring 7.5.0, we do not see counters incremented in cat /proc/interrupts/ for the interface from which we are reading the packets.
>>>> We are using standard i40e. driver on rhel 7.6 and have reduced the number of queues of this card interfaces to 4 and set the smp affinity explicitly.
>>>> Second problem - we can see ksoftirq for the assigned cores taking 100% of CPU due to which we are observing drop at the interface as well.
>>>> When we run tcpdump on the same interface, we can see the interrupts counts incrementing using above same command.
>>>>
>>>> 2- above observation is same when we deploy zc compiled i40e driver ;
>>>>
>>>> Will there be no interrupts with i40e driver when used with pf_ring ??
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Chandrika
>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 4, 2019, at 1:04 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano <cardigliano@ntop.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Chandrika
>>>>> are you observing better performance with ixgbe? Please note that ixgbe has a bigger buffer in the card,
>>>>> this could explain better performance in case of high traffic rate (what is the pps rate in this case?)
>>>>>
>>>>> Alfredo
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 28 Aug 2019, at 12:56, Chandrika Gautam <chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Alfredo,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Interrupts are not seen either with standard driver or with the zc compiled i40e driver as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What we do in our application is -
>>>>>> We load zc compiled i40e driver and put a zc license on that interface but we do not open device using zc: prefix.
>>>>>> Using this we have observed better performAnce in our application when used with ixgbe driver.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>> Chandrika
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Aug 28, 2019, at 12:58 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano <cardigliano@ntop.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Chandrika
>>>>>>> are you using the i40e-zc driver or the standard driver?
>>>>>>> Please note that ZC enables interrupts only when required for performance reason,
>>>>>>> for example some libpcap-based applications require interrupts as they use poll/select,
>>>>>>> instead many pf_ring-based application do not use interrupts at all (they do active polling).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alfredo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 28 Aug 2019, at 08:59, Chandrika Gautam <chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Team,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We have compiled our software with PF_RING 7.5.0 which reads from an interface on i40e driver.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Whenever we start our software, it process the traffic received on the interface but no interrupts are seen.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Whenever we start tcpdump on the same interface, then interrupts can be seen.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Can you please help to validate this behavior. Is it expected behavior ? We need to validate that the interrupts are coming on the cores to which we have set the affnity.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Chandrika
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>>>>>>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it
>>>>>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>>>>>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it
>>>>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>>>>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it
>>>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>>>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it
>>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it
>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it
>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc
Re: Query on software using Pfring 7.5 and i40e driver [ In reply to ]
Hi Chandrika
I suggest you to use other cards from the ixgbe family, e.g. X520.

Alfredo

> On 10 Sep 2019, at 13:40, Chandrika Gautam <chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Afredo,
>
> Can you please help which card you feel will give the same performance as intel 82599 with pfring to process 4-5 gbps of traffic.
> We are observing lots of drops at interface for x710 card while processing 2-3 gbps of traffic.
>
> Please note that intel 82599 is end of life.
>
> Regards,
> Chandrika
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Sep 10, 2019, at 11:41 AM, Chandrika Gautam <chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com <mailto:chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>> Hi Alfredo,
>> Please provide an update on this !
>> Regards,
>> Chandrika
>>
>>
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> Begin forwarded message:
>>
>>> From: Chandrika Gautam <chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com <mailto:chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com>>
>>> Date: September 9, 2019 at 8:47:55 AM GMT+5:30
>>> To: ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it <mailto:ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it>
>>> Subject: Re: [Ntop-misc] Query on software using Pfring 7.5 and i40e driver
>>>
>>> Hi Alfredo,
>>>
>>> Have you been able to look at this further ???
>>>
>>> Any feedback on ksoftirq reaching 100% continuously.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Chandrika
>>>
>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>
>>> On Sep 4, 2019, at 8:11 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano <cardigliano@ntop.org <mailto:cardigliano@ntop.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Chandrika
>>>> this is definitely strange: please note that with standard drivers interrupts
>>>> are not controlled by PF_RING as they are managed by the driver itself..
>>>> this is interesting, I will take a look asap.
>>>>
>>>> Alfredo
>>>>
>>>>> On 4 Sep 2019, at 14:15, Chandrika Gautam <chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com <mailto:chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> That’s the secondary issue which we will focus later on.
>>>>>
>>>>> So let me rephrase the problem statements -
>>>>> 1. This does not involve zc! Problem 1- When we are using our software integrated with pfring 7.5.0, we do not see counters incremented in cat /proc/interrupts/ for the interface from which we are reading the packets.
>>>>> We are using standard i40e. driver on rhel 7.6 and have reduced the number of queues of this card interfaces to 4 and set the smp affinity explicitly.
>>>>> Second problem - we can see ksoftirq for the assigned cores taking 100% of CPU due to which we are observing drop at the interface as well.
>>>>> When we run tcpdump on the same interface, we can see the interrupts counts incrementing using above same command.
>>>>>
>>>>> 2- above observation is same when we deploy zc compiled i40e driver ;
>>>>>
>>>>> Will there be no interrupts with i40e driver when used with pf_ring ??
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Chandrika
>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sep 4, 2019, at 1:04 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano <cardigliano@ntop.org <mailto:cardigliano@ntop.org>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Chandrika
>>>>>> are you observing better performance with ixgbe? Please note that ixgbe has a bigger buffer in the card,
>>>>>> this could explain better performance in case of high traffic rate (what is the pps rate in this case?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alfredo
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 28 Aug 2019, at 12:56, Chandrika Gautam <chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com <mailto:chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi Alfredo,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Interrupts are not seen either with standard driver or with the zc compiled i40e driver as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What we do in our application is -
>>>>>>> We load zc compiled i40e driver and put a zc license on that interface but we do not open device using zc: prefix.
>>>>>>> Using this we have observed better performAnce in our application when used with ixgbe driver.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Chandrika
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Aug 28, 2019, at 12:58 PM, Alfredo Cardigliano <cardigliano@ntop.org <mailto:cardigliano@ntop.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi Chandrika
>>>>>>>> are you using the i40e-zc driver or the standard driver?
>>>>>>>> Please note that ZC enables interrupts only when required for performance reason,
>>>>>>>> for example some libpcap-based applications require interrupts as they use poll/select,
>>>>>>>> instead many pf_ring-based application do not use interrupts at all (they do active polling).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Alfredo
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 28 Aug 2019, at 08:59, Chandrika Gautam <chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com <mailto:chandrika.iitd.rock@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi Team,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We have compiled our software with PF_RING 7.5.0 which reads from an interface on i40e driver.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Whenever we start our software, it process the traffic received on the interface but no interrupts are seen.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Whenever we start tcpdump on the same interface, then interrupts can be seen.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Can you please help to validate this behavior. Is it expected behavior ? We need to validate that the interrupts are coming on the cores to which we have set the affnity.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Chandrika
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>>>>>>>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it <mailto:Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it>
>>>>>>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc <http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>>>>>>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it <mailto:Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it>
>>>>>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc <http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc>_______________________________________________
>>>>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>>>>>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it <mailto:Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it>
>>>>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc <http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>>>>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it <mailto:Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it>
>>>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc <http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc>_______________________________________________
>>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>>>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it <mailto:Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it>
>>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc <http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Ntop-misc mailing list
>>>> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it <mailto:Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it>
>>>> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc <http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc>_______________________________________________
> Ntop-misc mailing list
> Ntop-misc@listgateway.unipi.it
> http://listgateway.unipi.it/mailman/listinfo/ntop-misc