[Click] userlevel performance

[Eddie Kohler]

Oh, duh, thanks for the reminder. :|


On 11/17/10 8:53 AM, Roman Chertov wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Nov 2010 08:24:37 -0800 Eddie Kohler<kohler at cs.ucla.edu>  wrote
>
>> Hey Beyers,
>>
>> On 10/29/10 5:02 PM, Beyers Cronje wrote:
>>> One last thing, the patch I just mailed to the list fixes an issue where
>>> "SNIFFER false" was not honored and you ended up in sniffer mode, which
>>> might affect performance.
>>
>> I'm sorry, I am just trying to process my email, and I can't actually
>> find this patch anywhere!  Has it been applied?
>
> I believe it is this patch.
> https://github.com/kohler/click/commit/123c9b9b3fe55d5c563a8175ae0b9108c0e78b99
> Roman
>
>>
>> Eddie
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Beyers
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 1:37 AM, Roman Chertov<rchertov at cs.ucsb.edu>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 13:58:50 -0700 Cliff Frey<cliff at meraki.com>   wrote
>>>>
>>>>> I don't have a setup that I can easily/quickly use to test.  All the
>>>> same,
>>>>> I'm curious what the interface statistics do during this time on both of
>>>> the
>>>>> interfaces (i.e. any errors?  how many packets transmitted/received)
>>>>
>>>> [local]# click test2.click -h ctr1.count -h ctr2.count -h fd.count -h
>>>> fd.kernel_drops
>>>> ctr1.count:
>>>> 100000
>>>>
>>>> ctr2.count:
>>>> 4503
>>>>
>>>> fd.count:
>>>> 0
>>>>
>>>> fd.kernel_drops:
>>>> ??
>>>>
>>>> ?? means that the number of kernel drops is unknown.
>>>>
>>>> [local]# ethtool -S eth2
>>>> NIC statistics:
>>>>       rx_packets: 9
>>>>       tx_packets: 100011
>>>>       rx_bytes: 2749
>>>>       tx_bytes: 150401691
>>>>
>>>> [local]# ethtool -S eth3
>>>> NIC statistics:
>>>>       rx_packets: 100004
>>>>       tx_packets: 17
>>>>       rx_bytes: 150400641
>>>>       tx_bytes: 3429
>>>>
>>>> According to ethtool, all of the 100000 packets were sent and received w/o
>>>> issues (the extra packets are due to IPv6 when the interfaces came on).
>>>>
>>>> So it looks like that problem is somewhere between Linux and Click getting
>>>> the
>>>> packets to ToDevice.  I am curious what results Bejers will get.
>>>>
>>>> Roman
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Also, I'm curious what was going on inside of ToDevice and FromDevice.
>>>>    The
>>>>> linuxmodule version of these elements have a bunch of counters (visible
>>>>> through the "calls" handler), it would be cool if the userlevel versions
>>>> had
>>>>> these things too (i.e. run_select_count, packets for both, write_errors,
>>>>> empty_pulls for ToDevice,  recvfrom_errors, recvfrom_eagains for
>>>> fromdevice)
>>>>>
>>>>> I doubt it, but you also might get different behavior if you add a Queue
>>>>> between the ratedsource and the todevice.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cliff
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 10:55 AM, Roman Chertov<rchertov at cs.ucsb.edu
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I was curious if anybody could try this test for me using userlevel
>>>> click.
>>>>>>    I am
>>>>>> running CentOS 5.5 2.6.18-194.17.1.el5, and I have two network cards
>>>>>> connected
>>>>>> with a single cable.  If I run the script below using userlevel click,
>>>>>> FromDevice(eth3) will receive very few packets and the majority would
>>>> end
>>>>>> up
>>>>>> dropped on input.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> src :: RatedSource(\<00>, LENGTH 1458, RATE 8000, LIMIT 100000)
>>>>>>      ->   UDPIPEncap(10.0.1.1, 6667, 20.0.0.2, 6667)
>>>>>>      ->   EtherEncap(0x0800, 00:30:48:F9:EA:7B, 00:17:cb:0d:f8:db)
>>>>>>      ->   ctr1 :: AverageCounter
>>>>>>      ->   ToDevice(eth2);
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> fd :: FromDevice(eth3, SNIFFER false, PROMISC true)
>>>>>>     ->   ctr2 :: AverageCounter
>>>>>>     ->   Discard;
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This script just requires ethX names to be changed; otherwise, it can
>>>> be
>>>>>> run as
>>>>>> is.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [root]# click test2.click -h ctr1.count -h ctr2.count
>>>>>> ctr1.count:
>>>>>> 100000
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ctr2.count:
>>>>>> 4482
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Roman
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> click mailing list
>>>>>> click at amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu
>>>>>> https://amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/click
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> click mailing list
>>>> click at amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu
>>>> https://amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/click
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> click mailing list
>>> click at amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu
>>> https://amsterdam.lcs.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/click
>
>