Re: Fw: Re: [Xen-users] bridge throughput problem

[Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx>]

On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 03:01:40PM +0530, Fasiha Ashraf wrote:
> Hi,
> Thanks for all your suggestions n help. I will surly give it a shot what you 
> have suggested. Please tell me:
> Is that ok to rebuild Dom0 kernel(v-2.6.18) on fedora11(v-2.6.29)??
> Or first I need to downgrade the kernel version?
>

No need to downgrade fedora kernel. Just compile the 2.6.18-xen kernel..
(and hope it has all the drivers for your hardware).

You could also try running CentOS5/RHEL5 kernel-xen on dom0, if the
linux-2.6.18-xen doesn't work.

-- Pasi

> Regards,
> Fasiha Ashraf
> 
> --- On Tue, 8/9/09, Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> From: Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: Fw: Re: [Xen-users] bridge throughput problem
> To: "Mike Williams" <mike@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Tuesday, 8 September, 2009, 12:56 PM
> 
> On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 10:16:38PM +0100, Mike Williams wrote:
> > Fasiha, you're not alone.
> > I've got a xen-tip/master pv_ops dom0 running, and I get roughly the same 
> > figures you do.
> 
> Can you verify the throughput problem gets fixed if you change the dom0
> kernel to non-pv_ops? (and keep the rest of the configuration and settings 
> unchanged).
> 
> http://xenbits.xen.org/linux-2.6.18-xen.hg
> 
> -- Pasi
> 
> > 0.14 domU to domU, and 12990.91 domU to dom0.
> > The netserver end is completely idle (as reported by sar), as is dom0, 
> > during 
> > all test.
> > 
> > Whereas a 2.6.18 based kernel on an old dual p3 xeon gets 327 and 456 
> > respectively.
> > 
> > On Monday 07 September 2009 11:15:01 Fasiha Ashraf wrote:
> > > I have tried what you suggested me. I pinned 1 core per guest also pin 1
> > > core to Dom0 instead of allowing dom0 to use all 8 cores. But the results
> > > remained same. Below are the details:-
> > > [root@HPCNL-SR-2 ~]# xm vcpu-list
> > > Name                                ID  VCPU   CPU State   Time(s) CPU
> > > Affinity Domain-0                             0     0     0   r--      
> > > 69.4
> > > any cpu Domain-0                             0     1     -   --p       4.7
> > > any cpu Domain-0                             0     2     -   --p       6.2
> > > any cpu Domain-0                             0     3     -   --p       5.5
> > > any cpu Domain-0                             0     4     -   --p       4.7
> > > any cpu Domain-0                             0     5     -   --p       3.5
> > > any cpu Domain-0                             0     6     -   --p       3.8
> > > any cpu Domain-0                             0     7     -   --p       3.5
> > > any cpu F11-G1S2                                   0                   0.0
> > > any cpu F11-G2S2                             1     0     1   -b-      14.7
> > > 1 F11-G3S2                             2     0     2   -b-      14.9 2
> > > F11-G4S2                                   0                   0.0 any cpu
> > >
> > > [root@F11-G2S2 ~]# netserver
> > > Starting netserver at port 12865
> > > Starting netserver at hostname 0.0.0.0 port 12865 and family AF_UNSPEC
> > >
> > > [root@F11-G3S2 ~]# netperf -l 60 -H 10.11.21.212
> > > TCP STREAM TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to 10.11.21.212
> > > (10.11.21.212) port 0 AF_INET Recv   Send    Send
> > > Socket Socket  Message  Elapsed             
> > > Size   Size    Size     Time     Throughput 
> > > bytes  bytes   bytes    secs.    10^6bits/sec 
> > >
> > >  87380  16384  16384    60.05       0.29  
> > >
> > > There is something strange that I have observed in my set-up, when i
> > > traceroute guest it doesn't reach any destination. do not get reply from
> > > nay hope. 
> > > [root@F11-G3S2 ~]# traceroute 10.11.21.212
> > > traceroute to 10.11.21.212 (10.11.21.212), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
> > >  1  * * *
> > >  2  * * *
> > >  3  * * *
> > >  4  * * *
> > >  5  * * *
> > >  6  *^C
> > > it displays the same stars till 30. normally it doesn't happen. It should
> > > be something like [root@F11-G3S2 ~]# traceroute 10.11.21.32
> > > traceroute to 10.11.21.32 (10.11.21.32), 30 hops max, 60 byte packets
> > >  1  10.11.21.32 (10.11.21.32)  0.740 ms  0.710 ms  0.674 ms
> > >
> > > I feel there is some network configuration issue. would Please guide me 
> > > how
> > > to find out the route cause and to resolve the problem. How can i check
> > > ICMP thing in  my fedora11 system?
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Fasiha Ashraf
> > >
> > > --- On Sat, 5/9/09, Fajar A. Nugraha <fajar@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Fajar A. Nugraha <fajar@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Subject: Re: [Xen-users] bridge throughput problem
> > > To: "Fasiha Ashraf" <feehapk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Date: Saturday, 5 September, 2009, 4:59 PM
> > >
> > > On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 12:06 PM, Fasiha Ashraf<feehapk@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > > What is Guest1 and Guest2?
> > > > These are PV domUs of Fedora11(32bit).
> > > > Is it on the same dom0 or on different dom0?
> > > > Yes, they are on the same host on same physical machine.
> > >
> > > Perhaps it's CPU/interrupt issue. Can you make sure that dom0, guest1,
> > > and guest2 ONLY use 1 vcpu each, and they're located on DIFFERENT
> > > physical cpu/core (xm vcpu-set, xm vcpu-pin), and repeat the test.
> > >
> > > Also, have another window running for each dom0/domU, and observe CPU
> > > load during that test with "top". Which domain uses 100%? Is it user
> > > or system?
> > 
> > -- 
> > Mike Williams
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > Xen-users mailing list
> > Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Xen-users mailing list
> Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users
> 
> 
> 
>       Love Cricket? Check out live scores, photos, video highlights and more. 
> Click here http://cricket.yahoo.com

_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users