Re: [PATCH net v4 1/2] net: sched: fix packet stuck problem for lockless qdisc

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 2021/4/21 13:31, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 21, 2021 at 09:52:40AM +0800, Yunsheng Lin wrote:
>> On 2021/4/21 4:34, Michal Kubecek wrote:
>>> However, I noticed something disturbing in the results of a simple
>>> 1-thread TCP_STREAM test (client sends data through a TCP connection to
>>> server using long writes, we measure the amount of data received by the
>>> server):
>>>
>>>   server: 172.17.1.1, port 12543
>>>   iterations: 20, threads: 1, test length: 30
>>>   test: TCP_STREAM, message size: 1048576
>>>   
>>>   1     927403548.4 B/s,  avg   927403548.4 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%)
>>>   2    1176317172.1 B/s,  avg  1051860360.2 B/s, mdev   124456811.8 B/s ( 11.8%), confid. +/-  1581348251.3 B/s (150.3%)
>>>   3     927335837.8 B/s,  avg  1010352186.1 B/s, mdev   117354970.3 B/s ( 11.6%), confid. +/-   357073677.2 B/s ( 35.3%)
>>>   4    1176728045.1 B/s,  avg  1051946150.8 B/s, mdev   124576544.7 B/s ( 11.8%), confid. +/-   228863127.8 B/s ( 21.8%)
>>>   5    1176788216.3 B/s,  avg  1076914563.9 B/s, mdev   122102985.3 B/s ( 11.3%), confid. +/-   169478943.5 B/s ( 15.7%)
>>>   6    1158167055.1 B/s,  avg  1090456645.8 B/s, mdev   115504209.5 B/s ( 10.6%), confid. +/-   132805140.8 B/s ( 12.2%)
>>>   7    1176243474.4 B/s,  avg  1102711907.0 B/s, mdev   111069717.1 B/s ( 10.1%), confid. +/-   110956822.2 B/s ( 10.1%)
>>>   8    1176771142.8 B/s,  avg  1111969311.5 B/s, mdev   106744173.5 B/s (  9.6%), confid. +/-    95417120.0 B/s (  8.6%)
>>>   9    1176206364.6 B/s,  avg  1119106761.8 B/s, mdev   102644185.2 B/s (  9.2%), confid. +/-    83685200.5 B/s (  7.5%)
>>>   10   1175888409.4 B/s,  avg  1124784926.6 B/s, mdev    98855550.5 B/s (  8.8%), confid. +/-    74537085.1 B/s (  6.6%)
>>>   11   1176541407.6 B/s,  avg  1129490061.2 B/s, mdev    95422224.8 B/s (  8.4%), confid. +/-    67230249.7 B/s (  6.0%)
>>>   12    934185352.8 B/s,  avg  1113214668.9 B/s, mdev   106114984.5 B/s (  9.5%), confid. +/-    70420712.5 B/s (  6.3%)
>>>   13   1176550558.1 B/s,  avg  1118086660.3 B/s, mdev   103339448.9 B/s (  9.2%), confid. +/-    65002902.4 B/s (  5.8%)
>>>   14   1176521808.8 B/s,  avg  1122260599.5 B/s, mdev   100711151.3 B/s (  9.0%), confid. +/-    60333655.0 B/s (  5.4%)
>>>   15   1176744840.8 B/s,  avg  1125892882.3 B/s, mdev    98240838.2 B/s (  8.7%), confid. +/-    56319052.3 B/s (  5.0%)
>>>   16   1176593778.5 B/s,  avg  1129061688.3 B/s, mdev    95909740.8 B/s (  8.5%), confid. +/-    52771633.5 B/s (  4.7%)
>>>   17   1176583967.4 B/s,  avg  1131857116.5 B/s, mdev    93715582.2 B/s (  8.3%), confid. +/-    49669258.6 B/s (  4.4%)
>>>   18   1176853301.8 B/s,  avg  1134356904.5 B/s, mdev    91656530.2 B/s (  8.1%), confid. +/-    46905244.8 B/s (  4.1%)
>>>   19   1176592845.7 B/s,  avg  1136579848.8 B/s, mdev    89709043.8 B/s (  7.9%), confid. +/-    44424855.9 B/s (  3.9%)
>>>   20   1176608117.3 B/s,  avg  1138581262.2 B/s, mdev    87871692.6 B/s (  7.7%), confid. +/-    42193098.5 B/s (  3.7%)
>>>   all                     avg  1138581262.2 B/s, mdev    87871692.6 B/s (  7.7%), confid. +/-    42193098.5 B/s (  3.7%)
>>>
>>> Each line shows result of one 30 second long test and average, mean
>>> deviation and 99% confidence interval half width through the iterations
>>> so far. While 17 iteration results are essentially the wire speed minus
>>> TCP overhead, iterations 1, 3 and 12 are more than 20% lower. As results
>>> of the same test on unpatched 5.12-rc7 are much more consistent (the
>>> lowest iteration result through the whole test was 1175939718.3 and the
>>> mean deviation only 276889.1 B/s), it doesn't seeem to be just a random
>>> fluctuation.
>>
>> I think I need to relearn the statistial math to understand the above
>> "99% confidence interval half width ":)
> 
> An easy way to understand it is that if the last column shows 42 MB/s,
> it means that with 99% confidence (probability), the measured average
> is within 42 MB/s off the actual one.
> 
>> But the problem do not seems related too much with "99% confidence
>> interval half width ", but with "mean deviation"?
> 
> Mean deviation is a symptom here. What worries me is that most results
> show the same value (corresponding to fully saturated line) with very
> little variation, in some iterations (1, 3 and 12 here) we can suddenly
> see much lower value (by ~2.5 GB/s, i.e. 20-25%). And as each iteration
> runs the connection for 30 seconds, it cannot be just some short glitch.
> 
> I managed to get tcpdump captures yesterday but they are huge even with
> "-s 128" (client ~5.6 GB, server ~9.0 GB) so that working with them is
> rather slow so I did not find anything interesting yet.
> 
>> I tried using netperf, which seems only show throughput of 9415.06
>> (10^6bits/sec) using 10G netdev. which tool did you used to show the
>> above number?
> 
> 9415.06 * 10^6 b/s is 1176.9 * 10^6 B/s so it's about the same as the
> numbers above (the good ones, that is). As this was part of a longer
> test trying different thread counts from 1 to 128, I was using another
> utility I started writing recently:

I tried using below shell to simulate your testcase:

#!/bin/sh

for((i=0; i<20; i++))
do
        taskset -c 0-31 netperf -t TCP_STREAM -H 192.168.100.2 -l 30 -- -m 1048576
done

And I got a quite stable result: 9413~9416 (10^6bits/sec) for 10G netdev.

> 
>   https://github.com/mkubecek/nperf
> 
> It is still raw and a lot of features are missing but it can be already
> used for multithreaded TCP_STREAM and TCP_RR tests. In particular, the
> output above was with
> 
>   nperf -H 172.17.1.1 -l 30 -i 20 --exact -t TCP_STREAM -M 1

I tried your nperf too, unfortunately it does not seem to work on my
system(arm64), which exits very quickly and output the blow result:

root@(none):/home# nperf -H 192.168.100.2 -l 30 -i 20 --exact -t TCP_STREAM -M 1
server: 192.168.100.2, port 12543
iterations: 20, threads: 1, test length: 30
test: TCP_STREAM, message size: 1048576

1             4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%)
2             4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%), confid. +/-           0.0 B/s (  0.0%)
3             4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%), confid. +/-           nan B/s (  nan%)
4             4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%), confid. +/-           0.0 B/s (  0.0%)
5             4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%), confid. +/-           0.0 B/s (  0.0%)
6             4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%), confid. +/-           0.0 B/s (  0.0%)
7             4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%), confid. +/-           0.0 B/s (  0.0%)
8             4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%), confid. +/-           0.0 B/s (  0.0%)
9             4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%), confid. +/-           0.0 B/s (  0.0%)
10            4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%), confid. +/-           0.0 B/s (  0.0%)
11            4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%), confid. +/-           0.0 B/s (  0.0%)
12            4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%), confid. +/-           0.0 B/s (  0.0%)
13            4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%), confid. +/-           0.0 B/s (  0.0%)
14            4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%), confid. +/-           0.0 B/s (  0.0%)
15            4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%), confid. +/-           0.0 B/s (  0.0%)
16            4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%), confid. +/-           0.0 B/s (  0.0%)
17            4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%), confid. +/-           0.0 B/s (  0.0%)
18            4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           0.0 B/s (  0.0%), confid. +/-           0.0 B/s (  0.0%)
19            4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           nan B/s (  nan%), confid. +/-           nan B/s (  nan%)
20            4.0 B/s,  avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           nan B/s (  nan%), confid. +/-           nan B/s (  nan%)
all                     avg           4.0 B/s, mdev           nan B/s (  nan%), confid. +/-           nan B/s (  nan%)

> 
> The results are with 1 thread so that they should be also reproducible
> with netperf too. But it needs to be repeated enough times, when
> I wanted to get the packet captures, I did 40 iterations and only two of
> them showed lower result.
> 
> Michal
> 
> .
> 




[Index of Archives]     [Automotive Discussions]     [Linux ARM Kernel]     [Linux ARM]     [Linux Omap]     [Fedora ARM]     [IETF Annouce]     [Security]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux]     [Linux OMAP]     [Linux MIPS]     [eCos]     [Asterisk Internet PBX]     [Linux API]     [CAN Bus]

  Powered by Linux