On Wed, 2017-05-31 at 14:42 -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 6:48 AM, Adrian Tomasov <atoma...@redhat.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 2017-05-30 at 18:27 -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 8:41 AM, Alexander Duyck
> > > <alexander.du...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 6:43 AM, Adam Okuliar <aokuliar@redhat.
> > > > com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hello,
> > > > >
> > > > > we found regression on intel card(XL710) with i40e driver.
> > > > > Regression is
> > > > > about ~45%
> > > > > on TCP_STREAM and TCP_MAERTS test for IPv4 and IPv6.
> > > > > Regression
> > > > > was first
> > > > > visible in kernel-4.12.0-0.rc1.
> > > > >
> > > > > More details about results you can see in uploaded images in
> > > > > bugzilla. [0]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > [0] https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=195923
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Best regards, / S pozdravom,
> > > > >
> > > > > Adrián Tomašov
> > > > > Kernel Performance QE
> > > > > atoma...@redhat.com
> > > >
> > > > I have added the i40e driver maintainer and the intel-wired-lan
> > > > mailing list so that we can make are developers aware of the
> > > > issue.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks.
> > > >
> > > > - Alex
> > >
> > > Adam,
> > >
> > > We are having some issues trying to reproduce what you reported.
> > >
> > > Can you provide some additional data. Specifically we would be
> > > looking
> > > for an "ethtool -i", and an "ethtool -S" for the port before and
> > > after
> > > the test. If you can attach it to the bugzilla that would be
> > > appreciated.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > >
> > > - Alex
> >
> > Hello Alex,
> >
> > requested files are updated in bugzilla.
> >
> > If you have any questions about testing feel free to ask.
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Adrian
>
> So looking at the data I wonder if we don't have an MTU mismatch in
> the network config. I notice the "after" has rx_length_errors being
> reported. Recent changes made it so that i40e doesn't support jumbo
> frames by default, whereas before we could. You might want to check
> for that as that could cause the kind of performance issues you are
> seeing.
>
> - Alex
There isn't MTU mismatch. Traffic path is : server -> switch ->
server.
Output from switch:
> show interfaces et-0/0/18
Physical interface: et-0/0/18, Enabled, Physical link is Up
Interface index: 644, SNMP ifIndex: 538
Link-level type: Ethernet, MTU: 1514, Speed: 40Gbps, BPDU Error:
None, MAC-REWRITE Error: None, Loopback: Disabled, Source filtering:
Disabled, Flow control: Disabled, Media type: Fiber
Device flags : Present Running
Interface flags: SNMP-Traps Internal: 0x4000
Link flags : None
CoS queues : 12 supported, 12 maximum usable queues
Current address: d4:04:ff:90:5a:4b, Hardware address:
d4:04:ff:90:5a:4b
Last flapped : 2017-06-01 10:09:32 CEST (01:21:29 ago)
Input rate : 432 bps (0 pps)
Output rate : 8336 bps (11 pps)
Active alarms : None
Active defects : None
Interface transmit statistics: Disabled
Logical interface et-0/0/18.0 (Index 552) (SNMP ifIndex 539)
Flags: SNMP-Traps 0x24024000 Encapsulation: Ethernet-Bridge
Input packets : 464041
Output packets: 209210
Protocol eth-switch, MTU: 1514
Flags: Is-Primary, Trunk-Mode
MTU is same for all et-0/0/x interfaces.
- Adrian
