Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 17:03:52 +0200 From: Vincenzo Maffione <v.maffione@gmail.com> To: John Jasen <jjasen@gmail.com> Cc: FreeBSD Net <freebsd-net@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: state of packet forwarding in FreeBSD? Message-ID: <CA%2B_eA9jCUqZ%2BxgH2oLopNwi9KziCfXjfU3_aX6PGUi442ZZXvA@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <CAACLuR17yRETErqsxbdhBPJrjQur0oMVOqvL5ZCkmjLCKkHLNA@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAACLuR17yRETErqsxbdhBPJrjQur0oMVOqvL5ZCkmjLCKkHLNA@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, To test netmap raw forwarding performance using just one core, use the bridge program between two netmap supported NICs, like ix or ixl # ./bridge ix0 ix1 You could implement your own multicore software router by extending the bridge example to implement the protocols you need. Vale-ctl it's a different story, you can use it to attach netmap enabled NICs to the VALE software bridge. See the VALE paper for details. Cheers, Vincenzo Il 14 giu 2017 4:48 PM, "John Jasen" <jjasen@gmail.com> ha scritto: > Our goal was to test whether or not FreeBSD currently is viable, as the > operating system platform for high speed routers and firewalls, in the > 40 to 100 GbE range. > > In our investigations, we tested 10.3, 11.0/-STABLE, -CURRENT, and a USB > stick from BSDRP using the FreeBSD routing improvements project > enhancements (https://wiki.freebsd.org/ProjectsRoutingProposal). > > We've tried stock and netmap-fwd, have played around a little with > netmap itself and dpdk, with the results summarized below. The current > testing platform is a Dell PowerEdge R530 with a Chelsio T580-LP-CR dual > port 40GbE card. > > Suggestions, examples for using netmap, etc, all warmly welcomed. > > Further questions cheerfully answered to the best of our abilities. > > a) On the positive side, it appears that 11.0 is much faster than 10.0, > which we tested several years ago. With appropriate cpuset tuning, 5.5 > mpps is achievable using modern hardware. Using slightly older hardware, > (such as a Dell R720 with v3 xeons), around 5.2-5.3 mpps can be obtained. > > b) On the negative side, between the various releases, netmap appeared > to be unstable with the Chelsio cards -- sometimes supported, sometimes > broken. Also, we're still trying to figure out netmap utilities, such as > vale-ctl and bridge, so any advice would be appreciated. > > b.1) netmap-fwd is admittedly single-threaded and does not support IPv6. > These clearly showed in our tests, as we were unable to achieve over 2.5 > mpps, saturating a single CPU and letting the others fall asleep. > However, bumping a single CPU queue from around 0.6 mpps to 2.5 mpps is > nothing to ignore, so it could be useful in some cases. > > c) The routing improvement project USB stick performed incredibly, > achieving 8.5 mpps out of the box. However, it appears > (https://wiki.freebsd.org/ProjectsRoutingProposal/ConversionStatus), > that many of the changes are still pending review, and that things have > not moved much in the last 18 months > (https://svnweb.freebsd.org/base/projects/routing/) > > d) We've not figured out dpdk (dpdk.org) yet. Our first foray into the > test examples, and we're stuck trying to get the interfaces online. > > -- John Jasen (jjasen@gmail.com) > _______________________________________________ > freebsd-net@freebsd.org mailing list > https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-net > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-net-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CA%2B_eA9jCUqZ%2BxgH2oLopNwi9KziCfXjfU3_aX6PGUi442ZZXvA>