linux-pci.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bjorn Helgaas <helgaas@kernel.org>
To: Ian Kumlien <ian.kumlien@gmail.com>
Cc: Kai-Heng Feng <kai.heng.feng@canonical.com>,
	linux-pci <linux-pci@vger.kernel.org>,
	Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>,
	"Saheed O. Bolarinwa" <refactormyself@gmail.com>,
	Puranjay Mohan <puranjay12@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] PCI/ASPM: Use the path max in L1 ASPM latency check
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2021 16:03:05 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210225220305.GA35159@bjorn-Precision-5520> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA85sZuSZck+mTnCTkGikuxQpmNyiShmrbhUUtv91rZARL5Jsw@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 11:19:55PM +0100, Ian Kumlien wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 1:41 PM Ian Kumlien <ian.kumlien@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Sorry about the late reply, been trying to figure out what goes wrong
> > since this email...
> >
> > And yes, I think you're right - the fact that it fixed my system was
> > basically too good to be true =)
> 
> So, finally had some time to look at this again...
> 
> I played some with:
> diff --git a/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c b/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c
> index ac0557a305af..fdf252eee206 100644
> --- a/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c
> +++ b/drivers/pci/pcie/aspm.c
> @@ -392,13 +392,13 @@ static void pcie_aspm_check_latency(struct
> pci_dev *endpoint)
> 
>         while (link) {
>                 /* Check upstream direction L0s latency */
> -               if ((link->aspm_capable & ASPM_STATE_L0S_UP) &&
> -                   (link->latency_up.l0s > acceptable->l0s))
> +               if ((link->aspm_capable & ASPM_STATE_L0S_UP) /* &&
> +                   (link->latency_up.l0s > acceptable->l0s)*/)
>                         link->aspm_capable &= ~ASPM_STATE_L0S_UP;
> 
>                 /* Check downstream direction L0s latency */
> -               if ((link->aspm_capable & ASPM_STATE_L0S_DW) &&
> -                   (link->latency_dw.l0s > acceptable->l0s))
> +               if ((link->aspm_capable & ASPM_STATE_L0S_DW) /* &&
> +                   (link->latency_dw.l0s > acceptable->l0s)*/)
>                         link->aspm_capable &= ~ASPM_STATE_L0S_DW;
>                 /*
>                  * Check L1 latency.
> ---
> 
> Which does perform better but doesn't solve all the issues...
> 
> Home machine:
> Latency:       3.364 ms
> Download:    640.170 Mbit/s
> Upload:      918.865 Mbit/s
> 
> My test server:
> Latency:       4.549 ms
> Download:    945.137 Mbit/s
> Upload:      957.848 Mbit/s
> 
> But iperf3 still gets bogged down...
> [  5]   0.00-1.00   sec  4.66 MBytes  39.0 Mbits/sec    0   82.0 KBytes
> [  5]   1.00-2.00   sec  4.60 MBytes  38.6 Mbits/sec    0   79.2 KBytes
> [  5]   2.00-3.00   sec  4.47 MBytes  37.5 Mbits/sec    0   56.6 KBytes
> 
> And with L1 ASPM disabled as usual:
> [  5]   0.00-1.00   sec   112 MBytes   938 Mbits/sec  439    911 KBytes
> [  5]   1.00-2.00   sec   109 MBytes   912 Mbits/sec  492    888 KBytes
> [  5]   2.00-3.00   sec   110 MBytes   923 Mbits/sec  370   1.07 MBytes
> 
> And just for reference, bredbandskollen again with L1 ASPM disabled:
> Latency:       2.281 ms
> Download:    742.136 Mbit/s
> Upload:      938.053 Mbit/s
> 
> Anyway, we started to look at the PCIe bridges etc, but i think it's
> the network card that is at fault, either with advertised latencies
> (should be lower) or some bug since other cards and peripherals
> connected to the system works just fine...
> 
> So, L0s actually seems to have somewhat of an impact - which I found
> surprising sice both machines are ~6 hops away - however latency
> differs (measured with tcp)
> 
> Can we collect L1 ASPM latency numbers for:
> Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation I211 Gigabit Network Connection (rev 03)

I think the most useful information would be the ASPM configuration of
the tree rooted at 00:01.2 under Windows, since there the NIC should
be supported and have good performance.

Bjorn

  reply	other threads:[~2021-02-25 22:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-10-07 13:28 [PATCH] Use maximum latency when determining L1 ASPM Ian Kumlien
2020-10-08  4:20 ` Kai-Heng Feng
2020-10-08 16:13 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-10-12 10:20   ` Ian Kumlien
2020-10-14  8:34     ` Kai-Heng Feng
2020-10-14 13:33       ` Ian Kumlien
2020-10-14 14:36         ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-10-14 15:39           ` Ian Kumlien
2020-10-16 14:53             ` Ian Kumlien
2020-10-16 21:28         ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-10-16 22:41           ` Ian Kumlien
2020-10-18 11:35             ` Ian Kumlien
2020-10-22 15:37               ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-10-22 15:41                 ` Ian Kumlien
2020-10-22 18:30                   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-10-24 20:55                     ` [PATCH 1/3] PCI/ASPM: Use the path max in L1 ASPM latency check Ian Kumlien
2020-10-24 20:55                       ` [PATCH 2/3] PCI/ASPM: Fix L0s max " Ian Kumlien
2020-11-15 21:49                         ` Ian Kumlien
2020-10-24 20:55                       ` [PATCH 3/3] [RFC] PCI/ASPM: Print L1/L0s latency messages per endpoint Ian Kumlien
2020-11-15 21:49                       ` [PATCH 1/3] PCI/ASPM: Use the path max in L1 ASPM latency check Ian Kumlien
2020-12-07 11:04                         ` Ian Kumlien
2020-12-12 23:47                       ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-12-13 21:39                         ` Ian Kumlien
2020-12-14  5:44                           ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-12-14  9:14                             ` Ian Kumlien
2020-12-14 14:02                               ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-12-14 15:47                                 ` Ian Kumlien
2020-12-14 19:19                                   ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-12-14 22:56                                     ` Ian Kumlien
2020-12-15  0:40                                       ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-12-15 13:09                                         ` Ian Kumlien
2020-12-16  0:08                                           ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-12-16 11:20                                             ` Ian Kumlien
2020-12-16 23:21                                               ` Bjorn Helgaas
2020-12-17 23:37                                                 ` Ian Kumlien
2021-01-12 20:42                       ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-01-28 12:41                         ` Ian Kumlien
2021-02-24 22:19                           ` Ian Kumlien
2021-02-25 22:03                             ` Bjorn Helgaas [this message]
2021-04-26 14:36                               ` Ian Kumlien
2021-04-28 21:15                                 ` Bjorn Helgaas
2021-05-15 11:52                                   ` Ian Kumlien

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20210225220305.GA35159@bjorn-Precision-5520 \
    --to=helgaas@kernel.org \
    --cc=alexander.duyck@gmail.com \
    --cc=ian.kumlien@gmail.com \
    --cc=kai.heng.feng@canonical.com \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=puranjay12@gmail.com \
    --cc=refactormyself@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).