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
next prev parent 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).