[Oisf-users] af_packet and rss queue count

[Peter Manev]

On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 1:27 PM, erik clark <philosnef at gmail.com> wrote:
> Sorry, I missed the bottom there. I am using
> https://github.com/JustinAzoff/can-i-use-afpacket-fanout to confirm that
> flows are properly being assigned.
>
> Be aware, this does NOT work with ESP traffic. I had seen reverse udp/tcp
> failures and couldn't figure out why, so I pulled pcap for the events (these
> are marked with source/dest information from the afpacket go script), and
> saw that 99.7ish% of the events posted with reverse failures were ESP
> traffic. Since I can't do anything with ESP content anyway, I could not care
> less that these are failing, as there is no way to do inspection on it.
>
> To get udp6/tcp6, you just set them with -N as in the example, specifying
> tcp6 instead of tcp4 and so on.
>

Ok. Thank you.
I will take a look and do some runs and will feedback the findings.

> On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 6:20 AM, erik clark <philosnef at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, thats the patch at marc.info in the previous email. Please note the
>> submitter of that patch. :)
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2016 at 4:10 AM, Peter Manev <petermanev at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 28 Dec 2016, at 15:00, erik clark <philosnef at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> (patch for ixgbe)
>>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=148181173415107&w=2
>>>
>>> (patch to ixgbe/src/kompat.h since it wont compile on rhel7.3 due to
>>> kernel version issues. None of this is pf_ring specific)
>>>
>>> https://raw.githubusercontent.com/ntop/PF_RING/41b6eb733e295c91375b135d2816dbdd09b4b548/drivers/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe-4.1.5-zc/src/kcompat.h
>>>
>>>
>>> In a different mail you mentioned that there is also a patch from Red Hat
>>> with regards to at-packet not working on this kernel version - is this
>>> fixed/working now?
>>>
>>>
>>> (ethtool arguments and irq setting)
>>>
>>> ethtool -C em1 rx-usecs 1 adaptive-rx off
>>> ethtool -G em1 rx 4096 tx 4096
>>> for x in tso gro lro gso rx tx sg; do ethtool -K em1 $x off; done
>>> /opt/src/ixgbe-4.4.6/scripts/set_irq_affinity em1
>>> ethtool -X em1 hkey
>>> 6d:5a:6d:5a:6d:5a:6d:5a:6d:5a:6d:5a:6d:5a:6d:5a:6d:5a:6d:5a:6d:5a:6d:5a:6d:5a:6d:5a:6d:5a:6d:5a:6d:5a:6d:5a:6d:5a:6d:5a
>>> ethtool -N em1 rx-flow-hash tcp4 sdfn
>>> ethtool -N em1 rx-flow-hash udp4 sdfn
>>>
>>>
>>> Can you confirm all flows are good for tcp/udp/4/6?
>>> (And how do you confirm it?)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I have 64 cores, and set_irq_affinity pulls a full set of 63 rss queues.
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 1:28 PM, erik clark <philosnef at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I will post that on Wednesday when I get back to work. Its 6? ethtool
>>>> statements, and 2 ixgbe patches (for rhel7 at least). Anything else should
>>>> be just 1 patch. This is running the 4.4.6 ixgbe released from intel
>>>> directly. This has worked for the most recent 3 kernels under RHEL7.
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Dec 24, 2016 at 12:51 PM, Peter Manev <petermanev at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> > On 24 Dec 2016, at 18:22, erik clark <philosnef at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > I have seen several places commenting that you should set the RSS
>>>>> > queue to 1. However, when examining af_packet with Bro, a patch released
>>>>> > from Redhat for the ixgbe kernel module, and some ethtool tweaking, we have
>>>>> > found that (for Bro at least) running a full 63 (we have 54 cores) RSS
>>>>> > queues vastly improves performance, and keeps state intact across sessions.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Based on this update, which fixes the broken implementation of
>>>>> > setting a symmetric hash in the hardware of the card
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you please share a bit in a bit more detail-
>>>>> Which ixgbe/kernel version that is ?
>>>>> Which patch is it ?
>>>>> What is the ethtool tweaking procedure?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> > (again ixgbe, not tested with i40e), is it still necessary to run one
>>>>> > queue? If so, you can't run Bro and Suri on the same box with af_packet and
>>>>> > get equivalent performance out of both tools. Having run Suri with 63 queues
>>>>> > for a week now, it seems performance is considerably better than with
>>>>> > pf_ring, and I can not find any unusual behavior in my alerts...
>>>>> >
>>>>> > _______________________________________________
>>>>> > Suricata IDS Users mailing list: oisf-users at openinfosecfoundation.org
>>>>> > Site: http://suricata-ids.org | Support:
>>>>> > http://suricata-ids.org/support/
>>>>> > List:
>>>>> > https://lists.openinfosecfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/oisf-users
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>



-- 
Regards,
Peter Manev