[andrea.m]

I’ve checked my business email <andrea.montanari@aubay.it> that’s the one that i used this morning but i can’t find your aswer, even in the spam folder.

Maybe with a link inside it was rejected by company server, idk. Please try to resend also in my personal account <andrea.monti.89@gmail.com>

Thanks

 

 

[andrea.m]

Yes, this CPU usage behaviour blocks a series of test and more releases that we have in program, so if you can update us with the sources patched in this way as soon as possible, we appreciate.

For the rest of the changes you have planned, that are really interesting, we can update more calmly.

Thanks again.

 

[andrea.m]

Hi Vadim, your build works perfectly! thank a lot.

as i told you my company bought source code and one year of assistance, and now we would need the sources updated with this fix.

I have sent to you an e-mail at support@ntkernel.com with all the details of the order.

Keep in touch.

[andrea.m]

Thank you Vadim, i will make some test also bymyself.

Please keep me informed if you have some news.

[andrea.m]

Many thanks for the help.

Jumbo packet are off by requirements.

I’m adding some screenshot to understand better, and there are also the HW spec.

When i start the test with the filter of i have that scenario ( idk why i can’t post links, add https: before to create link ) :

//ibb.co/3R7vd2b

//ibb.co/FH5pkNL

As you can see many cores are involved and network interface in almost full. Now i enable the filter:

and the result is

//ibb.co/q0Xspks

//ibb.co/93pBqLK

The NIC is a VLAN in this instance but with a physiscal one i have no change.

The bandwith drop is certainly because is the maximum amount of packets that a single core can handle. With npcap i dont’ have the same beahviour.

Hope it helps

Thanks again

[andrea.m]

This is preliminary test, after that by enabling the filter i have to do some operations on the packet flow.
In case some particular modification is needed, I have the sources.

Thanks again

[andrea.m]

Hi Vadim, thanks for the reply. Due to the hurry i didn’t explain well the problem, let me add some detail.

To test network bandwith i use a custom application (such iperf) that creates several connection, every connection on a different thread. This app can be sever or client and can be binded on a NIC, but it doesn’t know anything about the filter driver on the card and it doesn’t make any operation directly with driver (read packets etc), only a multiple socket based connection.

So if i start the test over the network with the filter disabled i achieve about 9,5+ Gbps and from task manager i see that the application threads are spreaded well on processor cores. If i use 10 different connections i see almost every core busy ( in my enviroment machines had 8 cores ).
More specifically form resource monitor i see that the load is split by my app ad System Interrupts.

By only enabling the filter from adapter properties in control panel ( any of two peers ), test result collapse to 2,5-3Gbps. My app run with same arguments the only difference is the filter active on the NIC.
Watching task manager and resource monitor only one core is busy ( in fact saturated ) by handle system interrupts. So the bandwith drop is certainly an effect of the use of the cores. One core can’t serve all interrupts and becomes the bottleneck.

Do you have any idea of the cause of this behavior?

Many thanks

[Author]

Posts