WARNING - OLD ARCHIVES

This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
   
 
 
Xen 
 
Home Products Support Community News
 
   
 

xen-users

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

To: Pasi Kärkkäinen <pasik@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Fw: Re: [Xen-users] bridge throughput problem
From: Fasiha Ashraf <feehapk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 12:17:34 +0530 (IST)
Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivery-date: Wed, 09 Sep 2009 23:48:34 -0700
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yahoo.co.in; s=s1024; t=1252565254; bh=/UEaWkyiYPH0yA3iyaFpxKp5buvuqOZpkyVTGGoqz8E=; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=G5yhVNliqy4QJyRGTt7CFeXXinzSPn0HzLfEPYE9KVL0ehUaCUyTikPbupTcWtkAVGRoK9UYd0ST4ausmC7NpdgjSYMc+RTFIgc5bvMjSXHPYdRiW9qLJ0anqxrs+gNrkiCmeI9GQFf4QdKKC7BQN1t5kTVfI7BHlxW5k8XxiFs=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=s1024; d=yahoo.co.in; h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:Date:From:Subject:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=xRrjLgiwe5trSU5sOfXY9YusiJW1Qk8xU1RRc4YZNwNGFMa95O3fGvx34+8tVJVoCgxFmhBdhWBrsGEFf0QJt+Kdo7esiiqnRGRV9dQi18I9PqJYp7E/PwXRlEs84bYn8u0Wx3KagRKhqX8a92XHJtVUmQrMUOIt9uorJCD2BUo=;
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20090908094853.GD31123@xxxxxxxxxxx>
List-help: <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen user discussion <xen-users.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-users@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/mailman/listinfo/xen-users>, <mailto:xen-users-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-users-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Hi,
some of my menuconfig options are not selected which are given below. all the others are marked [y].

Symbol: XEN_NETDEV_ACCEL_SFC_BACKEND [=n]

Prompt: Network-device backend driver acceleration for Solarflare NICs Defined at drivers/xen/Kconfig:104 Depends on: XEN && XEN_NETDEV_BACKEND && SFC && SFC_RESOURCE && X86 Location:

-> XEN

-> Backend driver support (XEN_BACKEND [=y])

-> Network-device backend driver (XEN_NETDEV_BACKEND [=y])

Selects: XEN_NETDEV_ACCEL_SFC_UTIL


Symbol: XEN_XENCOMM [=n]

Symbol: XEN_UNPRIVILEGED_GUEST [=n]


After building this kernel v-2.6.18.8
Its failed to boot this kernel displaying error 13 invalid or unsupported executable format
What could be the reason? Is it because I am compiling it on a higher version fedora11 kernel 2.6.29??

Regards,
Fasiha Ashraf

--- On Tue, 8/9/09, Pasi K�k�en <pasik@xxxxxx> wrote:

From: Pasi K�k�en <pasik@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Fw: Re: [Xen-users] bridge throughput problem
To: "Fasiha Ashraf" <feehapk@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Tuesday, 8 September, 2009, 2:48 PM

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 K�k�en <pasik@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> From: Pasi K�k�en <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


From cricket scores to your friends. Try the Yahoo! India Homepage!
_______________________________________________
Xen-users mailing list
Xen-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-users