From: "fugang.duan@freescale.com" <fugang.duan@freescale.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
Hector Palacios <hector.palacios@digi.com>
Cc: Marek Vasut <marex@denx.de>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"Fabio.Estevam@freescale.com" <Fabio.Estevam@freescale.com>,
"shawn.guo@linaro.org" <shawn.guo@linaro.org>,
"l.stach@pengutronix.de" <l.stach@pengutronix.de>,
"Frank.Li@freescale.com" <Frank.Li@freescale.com>,
"bhutchings@solarflare.com" <bhutchings@solarflare.com>,
"davem@davemloft.net" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: RE: FEC performance degradation with certain packet sizes
Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 02:44:40 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <0afcc48493b941ffab991d52b7c97a0d@BLUPR03MB373.namprd03.prod.outlook.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1387388339.19078.321.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Data: Thursday, December 19, 2013 1:39 AM
>To: Hector Palacios
>Cc: Marek Vasut; netdev@vger.kernel.org; Estevam Fabio-R49496;
>shawn.guo@linaro.org; l.stach@pengutronix.de; Li Frank-B20596; Duan Fugang-
>B38611; bhutchings@solarflare.com; davem@davemloft.net
>Subject: Re: FEC performance degradation with certain packet sizes
>
>On Wed, 2013-12-18 at 17:43 +0100, Hector Palacios wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm resending this thread (reworded the subject) with additional people on CC.
>> I found the issue happens also with auto-negotiated link and is reproducible
>on the
>> i.MX6 as well as on the i.MX28. It looks like a problem with the fec driver.
>>
>> Steps to reproduce:
>> On the target:
>> netpipe
>> On the host:
>> netpipe -h <target_ip> -n 5
>>
>> At certain packet sizes (starting always at 1533 bytes), the performance
>drops
>> dramatically:
>>
>> On i.MX28:
>> [...]
>> 42: 771 bytes 5 times --> 19.78 Mbps in 297.41 usec
>> 43: 1021 bytes 5 times --> 23.29 Mbps in 334.41 usec
>> 44: 1024 bytes 5 times --> 23.61 Mbps in 330.90 usec
>> 45: 1027 bytes 5 times --> 23.43 Mbps in 334.41 usec
>> 46: 1533 bytes 5 times --> 0.13 Mbps in 88817.49 usec
>> 47: 1536 bytes 5 times --> 0.06 Mbps in 189914.91 usec
>> 48: 1539 bytes 5 times --> 0.06 Mbps in 204917.19 usec
>> 49: 2045 bytes 5 times --> 0.07 Mbps in 210931.79 usec
>> 50: 2048 bytes 5 times --> 0.07 Mbps in 210919.10 usec
>> 51: 2051 bytes 5 times --> 0.07 Mbps in 212915.71 usec
>> 52: 3069 bytes 5 times --> 35.42 Mbps in 661.01 usec
>> 53: 3072 bytes 5 times --> 35.57 Mbps in 659.00 usec
>> 54: 3075 bytes 5 times --> 35.42 Mbps in 662.29 usec
>> 55: 4093 bytes 5 times --> 40.03 Mbps in 780.19 usec
>> 56: 4096 bytes 5 times --> 40.75 Mbps in 766.79 usec
>> 57: 4099 bytes 5 times --> 40.64 Mbps in 769.49 usec
>> 58: 6141 bytes 5 times --> 3.08 Mbps in 15187.90 usec
>> 59: 6144 bytes 5 times --> 2.94 Mbps in 15928.19 usec
>> 60: 6147 bytes 5 times --> 5.57 Mbps in 8418.91 usec
>> 61: 8189 bytes 5 times --> 1.34 Mbps in 46574.90 usec
>> 62: 8192 bytes 5 times --> 2.17 Mbps in 28781.99 usec
>> 63: 8195 bytes 5 times --> 1.36 Mbps in 45923.69 usec
>> 64: 12285 bytes 5 times --> 51.78 Mbps in 1810.21 usec
>> 65: 12288 bytes 5 times --> 50.46 Mbps in 1857.81 usec
>> 66: 12291 bytes 5 times --> 54.01 Mbps in 1736.21 usec
>> 67: 16381 bytes 5 times --> 55.86 Mbps in 2237.50 usec
>> 68: 16384 bytes 5 times --> 56.93 Mbps in 2195.79 usec
>> 69: 16387 bytes 5 times --> 35.62 Mbps in 3509.60 usec
>> 70: 24573 bytes 5 times --> 7.19 Mbps in 26075.60 usec
>> 71: 24576 bytes 5 times --> 58.36 Mbps in 3212.59 usec
>> 72: 24579 bytes 5 times --> 7.92 Mbps in 23678.90 usec
>> 73: 32765 bytes 5 times --> 58.14 Mbps in 4299.79 usec
>> 74: 32768 bytes 5 times --> 5.34 Mbps in 46810.20 usec
>> 75: 32771 bytes 5 times --> 41.51 Mbps in 6023.21 usec
>> 76: 49149 bytes 5 times --> 49.62 Mbps in 7557.20 usec
>> 77: 49152 bytes 5 times --> 48.82 Mbps in 7681.11 usec
>>
>> On i.MX6:
>> [...]
>> 42: 771 bytes 5 times --> 16.21 Mbps in 362.91 usec
>> 43: 1021 bytes 5 times --> 17.97 Mbps in 433.51 usec
>> 44: 1024 bytes 5 times --> 18.19 Mbps in 429.40 usec
>> 45: 1027 bytes 5 times --> 18.16 Mbps in 431.41 usec
>> 46: 1533 bytes 5 times --> 2.35 Mbps in 4970.11 usec
>> 47: 1536 bytes 5 times --> 2.36 Mbps in 4959.91 usec
>> 48: 1539 bytes 5 times --> 2.37 Mbps in 4959.20 usec
>> 49: 2045 bytes 5 times --> 3.14 Mbps in 4972.31 usec
>> 50: 2048 bytes 5 times --> 3.15 Mbps in 4959.50 usec
>> 51: 2051 bytes 5 times --> 3.15 Mbps in 4960.01 usec
>> 52: 3069 bytes 5 times --> 4.70 Mbps in 4984.19 usec
>> 53: 3072 bytes 5 times --> 4.73 Mbps in 4960.10 usec
>> 54: 3075 bytes 5 times --> 4.73 Mbps in 4957.81 usec
>> 55: 4093 bytes 5 times --> 6.29 Mbps in 4966.71 usec
>> 56: 4096 bytes 5 times --> 6.30 Mbps in 4962.00 usec
>> 57: 4099 bytes 5 times --> 6.31 Mbps in 4957.71 usec
>> 58: 6141 bytes 5 times --> 49.25 Mbps in 951.40 usec
>> 59: 6144 bytes 5 times --> 49.23 Mbps in 952.21 usec
>> 60: 6147 bytes 5 times --> 49.18 Mbps in 953.69 usec
>>
>> Does anyone have any clue about where the problem might be?
>
>What is the driver in use ?
>
>Have you tried disabling tso/gso ?
>
>ethtool -k eth0
>
>ethtool -K eth0 tso off gso off
>
Enet IP don't support tso feature.
I will reproduce the issue in imx6q/dl sd platform, and analyze the issue.
Previous test, we don't use netpipe tool test ethernet performance.
Thanks,
Andy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-19 3:00 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-11-22 12:40 FEC performance degradation on iMX28 with forced link media Hector Palacios
2013-11-24 4:40 ` Marek Vasut
2013-11-25 8:56 ` Hector Palacios
2013-12-18 16:43 ` FEC performance degradation with certain packet sizes Hector Palacios
2013-12-18 17:38 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-12-19 2:44 ` fugang.duan [this message]
2013-12-19 23:04 ` Eric Dumazet
2013-12-20 0:18 ` Shawn Guo
2013-12-20 3:35 ` fugang.duan
2013-12-20 15:01 ` Hector Palacios
2013-12-23 1:08 ` fugang.duan
2013-12-23 2:52 ` fugang.duan
2014-01-21 17:49 ` Marek Vasut
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=0afcc48493b941ffab991d52b7c97a0d@BLUPR03MB373.namprd03.prod.outlook.com \
--to=fugang.duan@freescale.com \
--cc=Fabio.Estevam@freescale.com \
--cc=Frank.Li@freescale.com \
--cc=bhutchings@solarflare.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=hector.palacios@digi.com \
--cc=l.stach@pengutronix.de \
--cc=marex@denx.de \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shawn.guo@linaro.org \
/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).