From owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org  Wed May 31 14:01:41 2017
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 636D9B7AC03
 for <freebsd-arch@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org>;
 Wed, 31 May 2017 14:01:41 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from emeric.poupon@stormshield.eu)
Received: from work.stormshield.eu (gwlille.netasq.com [91.212.116.1])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (Client did not present a certificate)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 27D3F7B5BF;
 Wed, 31 May 2017 14:01:40 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from emeric.poupon@stormshield.eu)
Received: from work.stormshield.eu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by work.stormshield.eu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44AE33760FD6;
 Wed, 31 May 2017 15:53:22 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by work.stormshield.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37D733760FC3;
 Wed, 31 May 2017 15:53:22 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from work.stormshield.eu ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (work.stormshield.eu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026)
 with ESMTP id bzkMO1xsBf6B; Wed, 31 May 2017 15:53:22 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from work.stormshield.eu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by work.stormshield.eu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 24F013760AC5;
 Wed, 31 May 2017 15:53:22 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 15:53:21 +0200 (CEST)
From: Emeric POUPON <emeric.poupon@stormshield.eu>
To: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org>
Cc: freebsd-arch <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
Message-ID: <1349284176.55940289.1496238801718.JavaMail.zimbra@stormshield.eu>
In-Reply-To: <CAJ-VmomtfHb7W_4c2OGpQ+4CF1jzsV4jvkyi0nVQtLNvx8XyYQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1914359731.54283525.1495178031163.JavaMail.zimbra@stormshield.eu>
 <CAJ-Vmo=6bpo1Yu6XosN3BiYOakjeXS8J7wenfubzkWz2SxXR1g@mail.gmail.com>
 <816581118.55670987.1496141816904.JavaMail.zimbra@stormshield.eu>
 <CAJ-Vmo=h3ASXiFWYT1E=xHQ+zZ_5+027dXibbPezj2CcHvGxVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <608664209.55736023.1496155561181.JavaMail.zimbra@stormshield.eu>
 <CAJ-VmomtfHb7W_4c2OGpQ+4CF1jzsV4jvkyi0nVQtLNvx8XyYQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: numa and taskqueues
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Thread-Topic: numa and taskqueues
Thread-Index: DCTgg8GnnVgqgfJ6UUtMgfgS/ihRrg==
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
 <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 31 May 2017 14:01:41 -0000


>>
>> Actually, there is a performance boost only when few flows are involved.
>> That's why this is not activated by default and a sysctl is here to enable the
>> feature.
>>
>> To sum up, the more different flows you process (both ciphered and unciphered),
>> the more network queues are hit and the more CPU units are triggered from
>> ipsec.
>> In this case, we indeed notice a loss, certainly due to the extra
>> queing/reordering performed.
> 
> Can you dig into that a bit more? Do you know exactly what's going on?
> eg, is it a "lock contention" problem? Is it a "stuff is context
> switching, thus latency" problem? etc, etc.
> 

Unfortunately I cannot tell you the exact reason right now.
I am sure there is no lock contention involved though (except of course when several domains are involved).
Did you expect such a dev to be enabled by default?

Emeric