Low throughput on Intel X710-DA2 10G-SR

stephenw10

Is it linked at 10G? What does ifconfig -vma show?

Yes, 1Gbps throughput seems suspiciously like part of you test is using a 1G connection.

How exactly are you testing? What command are you running?

What is the actual result you see?

Steve

Tryano95

@DaddyGo
Yes, it is really powerful, I am using it in our dorm (connected to our universities network) as an powerful nat-gw, with hopefully soon close to 10gbps

Thank you so much for taking your time to help me, I will look into this

Tryano95

@stephenw10
Hey Steve, thank you for your help!
Yes, it is linked with 10G. Connected to the same linecard as the identical debian server.

ifconfig -vma:

ixl0: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
        options=6400bb<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,JUMBO_MTU,VLAN_HWCSUM,VLAN_HWTSO,RXCSUM_IPV6,TXCSUM_IPV6>
        capabilities=7507bb<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,JUMBO_MTU,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,TSO6,LRO,VLAN_HWFILTER,VLAN_HWTSO,NETMAP,RXCSUM_IPV6,TXCSUM_IPV6>
        ether 
        hwaddr 
        inet6 X prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x5
        inet X.X.X.X netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast X.X.X.X
        ---lots of VIP's for NAT
        nd6 options=21<PERFORMNUD,AUTO_LINKLOCAL>
        media: Ethernet autoselect (10Gbase-SR <full-duplex>)
        status: active
        supported media:
                media autoselect
                media 10GBase-SFI
                media 10Gbase-LR
                media 10Gbase-SR
                media 10Gbase-Twinax
                media 1000baseLX
                media 1000baseSX
        plugged: SFP/SFP+/SFP28 10G Base-SR (LC)
        vendor: Intel Corp PN: FTLX8571D3BCV-IT SN: DATE: 2015-02-21
        module temperature: 33.57 C Voltage: 3.35 Volts
        RX: 0.55 mW (-2.58 dBm) TX: 0.62 mW (-2.04 dBm)
ixl1: flags=8843<UP,BROADCAST,RUNNING,SIMPLEX,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 1500
        options=6400bb<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,JUMBO_MTU,VLAN_HWCSUM,VLAN_HWTSO,RXCSUM_IPV6,TXCSUM_IPV6>
        capabilities=7507bb<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,VLAN_MTU,VLAN_HWTAGGING,JUMBO_MTU,VLAN_HWCSUM,TSO4,TSO6,LRO,VLAN_HWFILTER,VLAN_HWTSO,NETMAP,RXCSUM_IPV6,TXCSUM_IPV6>
        ether 
        hwaddr 
        inet6 X prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x6
        inet6 X prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x5
        inet X.X.X.X netmask 0xffffff00 broadcast X.X.X.X
        ---lots of VIP's for NAT
        nd6 options=21<PERFORMNUD,AUTO_LINKLOCAL>
        media: Ethernet autoselect (10Gbase-SR <full-duplex>)
        status: active
        supported media:
                media autoselect
                media 10GBase-SFI
                media 10Gbase-LR
                media 10Gbase-SR
                media 10Gbase-Twinax
                media 1000baseLX
                media 1000baseSX
        plugged: SFP/SFP+/SFP28 10G Base-SR (LC)
        vendor: Intel Corp PN: FTLX8571D3BCV-IT SN: DATE: 2014-07-20
        module temperature: 33.88 C Voltage: 3.31 Volts
        RX: 0.60 mW (-2.19 dBm) TX: 0.64 mW (-1.88 dBm)
lo0: flags=8049<UP,LOOPBACK,RUNNING,MULTICAST> metric 0 mtu 16384
        options=680003<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,LINKSTATE,RXCSUM_IPV6,TXCSUM_IPV6>
        capabilities=680003<RXCSUM,TXCSUM,LINKSTATE,RXCSUM_IPV6,TXCSUM_IPV6>
        inet6 ::1 prefixlen 128
        inet6 fe80::1%lo0 prefixlen 64 scopeid 0x7
        inet 127.0.0.1 netmask 0xff000000
        nd6 options=21<PERFORMNUD,AUTO_LINKLOCAL>
        groups: lo
enc0: flags=0<> metric 0 mtu 1536
        nd6 options=21<PERFORMNUD,AUTO_LINKLOCAL>
        groups: enc
pfsync0: flags=0<> metric 0 mtu 1500
        groups: pfsync
pflog0: flags=100<PROMISC> metric 0 mtu 33160
        groups: pflog

I am testing with iperf to an iperf-Server in the universities network.

Output pfSense:

iperf -c --IP-iperf-Server--
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to --IP-iperf-Server--, TCP port 5001
TCP window size:  336 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[  3] local --IP-Client-- port 54607 connected with --IP-iperf-Server-- port 5001
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[  3]  0.0-10.1 sec   562 MBytes   468 Mbits/sec

Output identical server debian:

iperf -c --IP-iperf-Server--
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to --IP-iperf-Server--, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.0 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[  3] local --IP-Client-- port 59112 connected with --IP-iperf-Server-- port 5001
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[  3]  0.0-10.0 sec  10.9 GBytes  9.37 Gbits/sec

Output pfSense to debian (same Linecard):

iperf -c --IP-debian--
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to --IP-debian--, TCP port 5001
TCP window size:  376 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[  3] local --IP-pfSense-- port 1526 connected with --IP-debian-- port 5001
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[  3]  0.0-10.0 sec  1.83 GBytes  1.57 Gbits/sec

Thank you!
Marius

---edit---
Switchport LAN&WAN of pfSense both say:

Full-duplex, 10Gb/s, link type is auto, media type is 10GBase-SR

DaddyGo

@Tryano95

Hi,

still Stephen in this theme the mng.
but what I see is that they failed to disable them:

Hardware Checksum Offloading
Hardware TCP Segmentation Offloading
Hardware Large Receive Offloading

RXCSUM, TXCSUM, etc

reminder, these will only take effect if you restart NGFW

the best way is to load it into loader.conf.local (so it is not affected by FW update)

net.inet.tcp.tso=0
net.inet.tcp.lro=0
etc.

stephenw10

Are you testing directly from pfSense itself there? That will always give you a worse result that testing through it.

The correct test here would be something like:

iperf client on Debian <---> pfSense <---> upstream local iperf server

Those NICs are loading 8 queues and the box has a 16 core CPU so you might also try 8 parallel streams using the switch -P 8.

Also try running on pfSense top -aSH while you're testing so see how the load is being spread there.
Though I would expect just one of those cores to pass 1Gbps....

Steve

Tryano95

@stephenw10
Yes, i am testing from pfSense, and i was just wondering about the bad throughput result with iperf.
The debian server is in the same subnet as the pfSense wan-interface.

NAT-Clients <---> pfSense <--10G--> Cisco-Router <--10G--> Uplink
                   debian <--10G--> Cisco-Router <--10G--> Uplink

Output with 8 parallel streams:

iperf -c --IP-iperf-Server-- -P 8
------------------------------------------------------------
Client connecting to --IP-iperf-Server--, TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 64.2 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[  9] local --IP-pfSense-- port 11410 connected with --IP-iperf-Server-- port 5001
[  7] local --IP-pfSense-- port 40453 connected with --IP-iperf-Server-- port 5001
[  8] local --IP-pfSense-- port 29998 connected with --IP-iperf-Server-- port 5001
[  6] local --IP-pfSense-- port 22254 connected with --IP-iperf-Server-- port 5001
[ 10] local --IP-pfSense-- port 31109 connected with --IP-iperf-Server-- port 5001
[  5] local --IP-pfSense-- port 14773 connected with --IP-iperf-Server-- port 5001
[  4] local --IP-pfSense-- port 65225 connected with --IP-iperf-Server-- port 5001
[  3] local --IP-pfSense-- port 18818 connected with --IP-iperf-Server-- port 5001
[ ID] Interval       Transfer     Bandwidth
[  9]  0.0-10.0 sec   641 MBytes   538 Mbits/sec
[  7]  0.0-10.0 sec   639 MBytes   536 Mbits/sec
[  8]  0.0-10.0 sec   598 MBytes   501 Mbits/sec
[  6]  0.0-10.0 sec  1.33 GBytes  1.15 Gbits/sec
[ 10]  0.0-10.0 sec  1.18 GBytes  1.01 Gbits/sec
[  5]  0.0-10.0 sec   613 MBytes   514 Mbits/sec
[  4]  0.0-10.0 sec  1.19 GBytes  1.02 Gbits/sec
[  3]  0.0-10.0 sec  1.16 GBytes   997 Mbits/sec
[SUM]  0.0-10.0 sec  7.29 GBytes  6.26 Gbits/sec

I was able to get a much better throughput (because of the parallel streams), it seems like the load is spread to 2 to 4 CPUs. What i did not test until now is to get a 10G connection through pfSense like:

debian <--10G--> pfSense <--10G--> Router <--10G--> Uplink

Hm, i was thinking, that when the iperf from pfSense is not able to get more than ~1Gbps, than the throughput will be also around that speed ... so the clients behind pfSense will get in total around 10Gbps (like 10x 1G)? A single connection through pfSense will also be able to get a speed of around 10gbps (1x 10G)?

@DaddyGo
Is it still useful in my case to enable:

Hardware Checksum Offloading
Hardware TCP Segmentation Offloading
Hardware Large Receive Offloading

Thank you both for your answers!
Marius

DaddyGo

@Tryano95 said in Low throughput on Intel X710-DA2 10G-SR:

@DaddyGo
*> Is it still useful in my case to enable:

Hardware Checksum Offloading
Hardware TCP Segmentation Offloading
Hardware Large Receive Offloading*

you mean, disable it......

generally telling that yes (these must be disabled (checked)),........and yes in any case (my opinion)
if you are using IPS (Suricata / Snort) with netmap it is mandatory!!!

LRO, TSO these things are good for you if you are an endpoint - it's not good if you're a router..

I will help you with a few useful links I have collected over the years (in this theme):

https://forum.netgate.com/topic/137835/suricata-inline-with-igb-nics
https://calomel.org/freebsd_network_tuning.html

++++edit:
of course loader.conf.local is the right way

stephenw10

@Tryano95 said in Low throughput on Intel X710-DA2 10G-SR:

Hm, i was thinking, that when the iperf from pfSense is not able to get more than ~1Gbps, than the throughput will be also around that speed ...

You will always see better speed through pfSense than directly to or from it. pfSense is not optimised as a TCP end point. Running iperf uses significant CPU cycles itself that could otherwise be routing packets. That's especially true if ut ends up using the same cores. top -aSH would show you that.

Steve

Tryano95

Thank you both. System is working fine.
Marius

DaddyGo

@Tryano95

You welcome