From nobody Mon Oct 21 14:42:49 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-net@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4XXJ2p177yz5ZMGW for ; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 14:43:30 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ccfreebsd@gmail.com) Received: from mail-lf1-f54.google.com (mail-lf1-f54.google.com [209.85.167.54]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "WR4" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4XXJ2n1CVSz4b7G for ; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 14:43:29 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from ccfreebsd@gmail.com) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of ccfreebsd@gmail.com designates 209.85.167.54 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=ccfreebsd@gmail.com; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed), No valid DKIM" header.from=freebsd.org (policy=none) Received: by mail-lf1-f54.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-539e4908837so619337e87.0 for ; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 07:43:29 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1729521806; x=1730126606; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=8iPAayadS1tC3PLQt6jx1fucIdBCfv0+dVgvWF+VpuQ=; b=KrLue5PIxZdOGvpcXcEqnpKX85qPW0Hpguzq7p+Cr7dnza0T+jF0+sT4ssnAYsjFWs PNiQMz0gpNwXHgna9gimlC+bT0UMgyjwnDA3O7i6HFtjqYWY7j+rfY6N2vDz41Umeduy Xe0JVMjKjyw0WD9nV0zdgs6KkFwsD2YGQlEdLoVTRQhwN6+PO7k5bw2y08py/D6Y9zt1 8kYjVu92nB7qCWkC3EW6m48eSfBgOGvaSHuCq0A51gP8SUsBU//6ZZeuYusSlyUDeEeI VixAlUivIIGob3By2HAS7Wd/FMvfteRRhs6UvvROZiLLCG/5b3ibxB7V7kAbhjuTgObo Uoeg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YwFNNtoh9kPOBsUwJMZPpXn9A8F2L030kDRPVzBDKzgW0m0xgw1 4BOp1CsmgBB+w8SQpTpuZgsOHrZ9zvBPrPe0jUBlox+6SxSRwuxNtBjUEw+n X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IEMuMbwYgCrnvWxyi64X9u+rj0ir0SLB7zx2t5JVLNd2N3/QbhJYX/TqxIaR3RnodmG1cZTpg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:2386:b0:52f:c438:883c with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-53a154443efmr1831067e87.1.1729521806034; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 07:43:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-lf1-f45.google.com (mail-lf1-f45.google.com. [209.85.167.45]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 2adb3069b0e04-53a223f002dsm500070e87.108.2024.10.21.07.43.25 for (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 21 Oct 2024 07:43:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-lf1-f45.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-539e4908837so619333e87.0 for ; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 07:43:25 -0700 (PDT) X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3ca5:b0:52f:413:30de with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-53a154dab9amr1781292e87.7.1729521805630; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 07:43:25 -0700 (PDT) List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-net List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20240912181618.7895d10ad5ff2ebae9883192@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Cheng Cui Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 10:42:49 -0400 X-Gmail-Original-Message-ID: Message-ID: Subject: Re: Performance test for CUBIC in stable/14 To: void Cc: "freebsd-net@FreeBSD.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000db2dbc0624fdac81" X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-0.80 / 15.00]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.99)[-0.986]; NEURAL_SPAM_SHORT(0.93)[0.934]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.85)[-0.849]; FORGED_SENDER(0.30)[cc@freebsd.org,ccfreebsd@gmail.com]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:209.85.128.0/17]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[multipart/alternative,text/plain]; DMARC_POLICY_SOFTFAIL(0.10)[freebsd.org : SPF not aligned (relaxed), No valid DKIM,none]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_COUNT_THREE(0.00)[3]; FREEMAIL_TO(0.00)[f-m.fm]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_EQ_ADDR_SOME(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+,1:+,2:~]; RCVD_TLS_LAST(0.00)[]; MISSING_XM_UA(0.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:209.85.128.0/17, country:US]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-net@freebsd.org]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; FROM_NEQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[cc@freebsd.org,ccfreebsd@gmail.com]; FREEMAIL_ENVFROM(0.00)[gmail.com]; MLMMJ_DEST(0.00)[freebsd-net@freebsd.org]; RWL_MAILSPIKE_POSSIBLE(0.00)[209.85.167.54:from]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE(0.00)[209.85.167.54:from,209.85.167.45:received] X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4XXJ2n1CVSz4b7G X-Spamd-Bar: / --000000000000db2dbc0624fdac81 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Change the subject to `Performance test for CUBIC in stable/14`, was `Re: Performance issues with vnet jails + epair + bridge`. I actually prepared two patches, one depends on the other: https://reviews.freebsd.org/D47218 << apply this patch firstly https://reviews.freebsd.org/D47213 << apply this patch secondly Please let me know if you have any questions. It passed my local test on a 1% drop rate link, with nearly 3.9X performance improvement. before patching: [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr Cwnd [ 5] 0.00-1.07 sec 27.0 MBytes 211 Mbits/sec 207 12.8 KBytes [ 5] 1.07-2.12 sec 18.0 MBytes 144 Mbits/sec 151 11.4 KBytes [ 5] 2.12-3.07 sec 22.0 MBytes 194 Mbits/sec 189 11.8 KBytes [ 5] 3.07-4.07 sec 23.0 MBytes 194 Mbits/sec 203 10.8 KBytes [ 5] 4.07-5.06 sec 18.0 MBytes 153 Mbits/sec 165 15.0 KBytes [ 5] 5.06-6.11 sec 25.0 MBytes 200 Mbits/sec 227 26.9 KBytes [ 5] 6.11-7.07 sec 23.0 MBytes 201 Mbits/sec 189 10.7 KBytes [ 5] 7.07-8.07 sec 23.0 MBytes 193 Mbits/sec 215 12.7 KBytes [ 5] 8.07-9.03 sec 22.0 MBytes 191 Mbits/sec 185 10.4 KBytes [ 5] 9.03-10.09 sec 24.0 MBytes 191 Mbits/sec 219 1.41 KBytes - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr [ 5] 0.00-10.09 sec 225 MBytes 187 Mbits/sec 1950 sender [ 5] 0.00-10.14 sec 225 MBytes 186 Mbits/sec receiver iperf Done. after patching: [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr Cwnd [ 5] 0.00-1.08 sec 118 MBytes 919 Mbits/sec 872 47.5 KBytes [ 5] 1.08-2.07 sec 109 MBytes 917 Mbits/sec 849 56.9 KBytes [ 5] 2.07-3.09 sec 111 MBytes 915 Mbits/sec 810 54.5 KBytes [ 5] 3.09-4.07 sec 108 MBytes 922 Mbits/sec 831 43.8 KBytes [ 5] 4.07-5.07 sec 109 MBytes 919 Mbits/sec 813 31.1 KBytes [ 5] 5.07-6.02 sec 103 MBytes 913 Mbits/sec 815 60.2 KBytes [ 5] 6.02-7.07 sec 116 MBytes 921 Mbits/sec 850 58.2 KBytes [ 5] 7.07-8.06 sec 109 MBytes 922 Mbits/sec 822 46.4 KBytes [ 5] 8.06-9.06 sec 109 MBytes 913 Mbits/sec 843 59.4 KBytes [ 5] 9.06-10.07 sec 110 MBytes 917 Mbits/sec 815 42.3 KBytes - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [ ID] Interval Transfer Bitrate Retr [ 5] 0.00-10.07 sec 1.08 GBytes 918 Mbits/sec 8320 sender [ 5] 0.00-10.11 sec 1.08 GBytes 915 Mbits/sec receiver iperf Done. cc On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 9:13=E2=80=AFAM void wrote: > On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 07:28:49AM -0400, Cheng Cui wrote: > > >The patch is a TCP congestion control algorithm improvement. So to > >be clear, it only impacts a TCP data sender. These hosts are just traffi= c > >forwarders, not TCP sender/receiver. > > > >I can send you a patch for the FreeBSD 14/stable to test performance > >improvement. > > sure! I'm happy to test > > >If you think FreeBSD 14.x releases are critical to your business, or you > >can't wait until FreeBSD 15 is released, you can file a request to add > this > >patch in the 14.x. I think https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/ is where a > >user can file such request. If it is approved, which I am not sure if > >it can be approved, then maybe it can be included in the next 14.x > release. > > thank you, I'll try :D > -- > > --=20 Best Regards, Cheng Cui --000000000000db2dbc0624fdac81 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Change the subject to `Performance test for CUBIC in = stable/14`, was `Re: Performan= ce issues with vnet jails + epair + bridge`.

I actually prepared two patches, one depends on the other:

=
https://reviews.freebsd.org/D47218 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 << apply= this patch firstly

before patching:
[ ID] Interval =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Transfer =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 Bitrate =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Retr =C2=A0Cwnd
[ =C2=A05] = =C2=A0 0.00-1.07 =C2=A0 sec =C2=A027.0 MBytes =C2=A0 211 Mbits/sec =C2=A020= 7 =C2=A0 12.8 KBytes =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0
[ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 1.07-2.12 = =C2=A0 sec =C2=A018.0 MBytes =C2=A0 144 Mbits/sec =C2=A0151 =C2=A0 11.4 KBy= tes =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0
[ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 2.12-3.07 =C2=A0 sec =C2=A02= 2.0 MBytes =C2=A0 194 Mbits/sec =C2=A0189 =C2=A0 11.8 KBytes =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0
[ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 3.07-4.07 =C2=A0 sec =C2=A023.0 MBytes =C2=A0 = 194 Mbits/sec =C2=A0203 =C2=A0 10.8 KBytes =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0
[ =C2= =A05] =C2=A0 4.07-5.06 =C2=A0 sec =C2=A018.0 MBytes =C2=A0 153 Mbits/sec = =C2=A0165 =C2=A0 15.0 KBytes =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0
[ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 5.0= 6-6.11 =C2=A0 sec =C2=A025.0 MBytes =C2=A0 200 Mbits/sec =C2=A0227 =C2=A0 2= 6.9 KBytes =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0
[ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 6.11-7.07 =C2=A0 sec = =C2=A023.0 MBytes =C2=A0 201 Mbits/sec =C2=A0189 =C2=A0 10.7 KBytes =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0
[ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 7.07-8.07 =C2=A0 sec =C2=A023.0 MBytes = =C2=A0 193 Mbits/sec =C2=A0215 =C2=A0 12.7 KBytes =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0
= [ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 8.07-9.03 =C2=A0 sec =C2=A022.0 MBytes =C2=A0 191 Mbits/s= ec =C2=A0185 =C2=A0 10.4 KBytes =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0
[ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 = 9.03-10.09 =C2=A0sec =C2=A024.0 MBytes =C2=A0 191 Mbits/sec =C2=A0219 =C2= =A0 1.41 KBytes =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - = - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Transf= er =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Bitrate =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Retr
[ =C2=A05] =C2= =A0 0.00-10.09 =C2=A0sec =C2=A0 225 MBytes =C2=A0 187 Mbits/sec =C2=A01950 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 sender
[ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 0.00-= 10.14 =C2=A0sec =C2=A0 225 MBytes =C2=A0 186 Mbits/sec =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0receiver

iperf Done.

after patching:
[ ID] Interval =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Transfer =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Bitrate =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 Retr =C2=A0Cwnd
[ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 0.00-1.08 =C2=A0 sec =C2=A0= 118 MBytes =C2=A0 919 Mbits/sec =C2=A0872 =C2=A0 47.5 KBytes =C2=A0 =C2=A0= =C2=A0
[ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 1.08-2.07 =C2=A0 sec =C2=A0 109 MBytes =C2=A0= 917 Mbits/sec =C2=A0849 =C2=A0 56.9 KBytes =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0
[ =C2= =A05] =C2=A0 2.07-3.09 =C2=A0 sec =C2=A0 111 MBytes =C2=A0 915 Mbits/sec = =C2=A0810 =C2=A0 54.5 KBytes =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0
[ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 3.0= 9-4.07 =C2=A0 sec =C2=A0 108 MBytes =C2=A0 922 Mbits/sec =C2=A0831 =C2=A0 4= 3.8 KBytes =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0
[ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 4.07-5.07 =C2=A0 sec = =C2=A0 109 MBytes =C2=A0 919 Mbits/sec =C2=A0813 =C2=A0 31.1 KBytes =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0
[ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 5.07-6.02 =C2=A0 sec =C2=A0 103 MBytes = =C2=A0 913 Mbits/sec =C2=A0815 =C2=A0 60.2 KBytes =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0
= [ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 6.02-7.07 =C2=A0 sec =C2=A0 116 MBytes =C2=A0 921 Mbits/s= ec =C2=A0850 =C2=A0 58.2 KBytes =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0
[ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 = 7.07-8.06 =C2=A0 sec =C2=A0 109 MBytes =C2=A0 922 Mbits/sec =C2=A0822 =C2= =A0 46.4 KBytes =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0
[ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 8.06-9.06 =C2=A0= sec =C2=A0 109 MBytes =C2=A0 913 Mbits/sec =C2=A0843 =C2=A0 59.4 KBytes = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0
[ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 9.06-10.07 =C2=A0sec =C2=A0 110 = MBytes =C2=A0 917 Mbits/sec =C2=A0815 =C2=A0 42.3 KBytes =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
[ ID] Interval= =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Transfer =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Bitrate =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 Retr
[ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 0.00-10.07 =C2=A0sec =C2=A01= .08 GBytes =C2=A0 918 Mbits/sec =C2=A08320 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2= =A0 =C2=A0 sender
[ =C2=A05] =C2=A0 0.00-10.11 =C2=A0sec =C2=A01.08 GByt= es =C2=A0 915 Mbits/sec =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 = =C2=A0 =C2=A0receiver

iperf Done.

cc
On Fri, O= ct 18, 2024 at 9:13=E2=80=AFAM void <void= @f-m.fm> wrote:
On Fri, Oct 18, 2024 at 07= :28:49AM -0400, Cheng Cui wrote:

>The patch is a TCP congestion control algorithm improvement. So to
>be clear, it only impacts a TCP data sender. These hosts are just traff= ic
>forwarders, not TCP sender/receiver.
>
>I can send you a patch for the FreeBSD 14/stable to test performance >improvement.

sure! I'm happy to test

>If you think FreeBSD 14.x releases are critical to your business, or yo= u
>can't wait until FreeBSD 15 is released, you can file a request to = add this
>patch in the 14.x. I think https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/<= /a> is where a
>user can file such request. If it is approved, which I am not sure if <= br> >it can be approved, then maybe it can be included in the next 14.x rele= ase.

thank you, I'll try :D
--



--
Best Regards,
Cheng Cui
--000000000000db2dbc0624fdac81--