On 21/06/2024 15:35, Samuel Dobron wrote:
Hey all,
Yeah, we do tests for ELN kernels [1] on a regular basis. Since
~January of this year.
As already mentioned, mlx5 is the only driver affected by this regression.
Unfortunately, I think Jesper is actually hitting 2 regressions we noticed,
the one already mentioned by Toke, another one [0] has been reported
in early February.
Btw. issue mentioned by Toke has been moved to Jira, see [5].
Not sure all of you are able to see the content of [0], Jira says it's
RH-confidental.
So, I am not sure how much I can share without being fired :D. Anyway,
affected kernels have been released a while ago, so anyone can find it
on its own.
Basically, we detected 5% regression on XDP_DROP+mlx5 (currently, we
don't have data for any other XDP mode) in kernel-5.14 compared to
previous builds.
From tests history, I can see (most likely) the same improvement
on 6.10rc2 (from 15Mpps to 17-18Mpps), so I'd say 20% drop has been
(partially) fixed?
For earlier 6.10. kernels we don't have data due to [3] (there is regression on
XDP_DROP as well, but I believe it's turbo-boost issue, as I mentioned
in issue).
So if you want to run tests on 6.10. please see [3].
Summary XDP_DROP+mlx5@25G:
kernel pps
<5.14 20.5M baseline
=5.14 19M [0]
<6.4 19-20M baseline for ELN kernels
=6.4 15M [4 and 5] (mentioned by Toke)
+ @Dragos
That's about when we added several changes to the RX datapath.
Most relevant are:
- Fully removing the in-driver RX page-cache.
- Refactoring to support XDP multi-buffer.
We tested XDP performance before submission, I don't recall we noticed
such a degradation.
I'll check with Dragos as he probably has these reports.
=6.10 ??? [3]
=6.10rc2 17M-18M
It looks like this is known since March, was this ever reported to Nvidia back
then? :/
Not sure if that's a question for me, I was told, filling an issue in
Bugzilla/Jira is where
our competences end. Who is supposed to report it to them?
Given XDP is in the critical path for many in production, we should think about
regular performance reporting for the different vendors for each released kernel,
similar to here [0].
I think this might be the part of upstream kernel testing with LNST?
Maybe Jesper
knows more about that? Until then, I think, I can let you know about
new regressions we catch.
Thanks,
Sam.
[0] https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-24054
[1] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/search?terms=kernel-%5Cd.*eln*&type=build&match=regexp
[2] https://koji.fedoraproject.org/koji/buildinfo?buildID=2469107
[3] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2282969
[4] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2270408
[5] https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-24054
