Upgrade to 2.3.1 causes network performance degradation (High CPU usage by NIC)

  • Hi,

    Currently we have a 2-node pfsense system working in active/passive HA. This cluster was running pfsense v2.2.3, and recently we upgraded the slave node to v2.3.1-1, and forced a failover from master to slave in order to test things..

    This system is running a mix of normal pf filtering, some IPSec tunnels, and also an HAProxy instance exposing a few (+-10) frontend+backends.

    However, the upgraded node (when running as master), shows a clear network performance degradation: While node-1 (the one still running v2.2.3) can easily forward traffic at +250Mb/s, the alternate node (the one running v2.3) tops at +-80Mb/s.

    While diagnosing the issue we’ve found node running pfSense v2.3 to have a high load under such a ‘low’ traffic (ie. 80Mb/s), and high CPU usage by network drivers, as show below:

    [2.3.1-RELEASE][root@]/root: top -nCHSIzs1
    last pid: 28317;  load averages:  4.07,  4.23,  4.37  up 2+11:40:04    16:22:50
    311 processes: 9 running, 282 sleeping, 20 waiting

    Mem: 31M Active, 502M Inact, 385M Wired, 883M Buf, 5020M Free

        0 root      -92    -    0K  240K CPU1    1  21.8H  99.37% kernel{nfe0 taskq}
        0 root      -92    -    0K  240K CPU2    2  29.4H  73.29% kernel{em0 taskq}
        0 root      -92    -    0K  240K CPU0    0  18.6H  44.78% kernel{em1 taskq}
      12 root      -72    -    0K  336K WAIT    0  65:15  14.60% intr{swi1: netisr 0}
      438 nobody      22    0 30184K  4404K select  3 121:18  4.79% dnsmasq
    28430 root        21    0 43756K 17440K kqread  3  51:40  1.46% haproxy
      12 root      -72    -    0K  336K WAIT    0  31:51  1.37% intr{swi1: pfsync}
    90479 root        20    0 25720K  7176K select  2  23:43  0.59% openvpn
    49607 root        20    0 14516K  2320K select  0  28:31  0.29% syslogd
    30713 root        20    0 16676K  2736K bpf    0  18:55  0.10% filterlog
    28317 root        21    0 21856K  2992K CPU2    2  0:00  0.10% top

    Obviously, firewall rules, services configuration, IPSec tunnels, etc. are configured the same on both nodes. And we’ve compared system values (like tunables, /boot/loader.conf*, and runtime sysctl values across both nodes).. So it looks like an issue with regard to pfSense 2.3 kernel code changes/enhancements.

    Both nodes are identical hardware, consisting on:

    FreeBSD 10.3-RELEASE-p3 #2 1988fec(RELENG_2_3_1): Wed May 25 14:14:46 CDT 2016
        root@ce23-amd64-builder:/builder/pfsense-231/tmp/obj/builder/pfsense-231/tmp/FreeBSD-src/sys/pfSense amd64
    FreeBSD clang version 3.4.1 (tags/RELEASE_34/dot1-final 208032) 20140512
    CPU: Dual-Core AMD Opteron™ Processor 2216 (2393.69-MHz K8-class CPU)
      Origin="AuthenticAMD"  Id=0x40f12  Family=0xf  Model=0x41  Stepping=2
      Features=0x178bfbff <fpu,vme,de,pse,tsc,msr,pae,mce,cx8,apic,sep,mtrr,pge,mca,cmov,pat,pse36,clflush,mmx,fxsr,sse,sse2,htt>Features2=0x2001 <sse3,cx16>AMD Features=0xea500800 <syscall,nx,mmx+,ffxsr,rdtscp,lm,3dnow!+,3dnow!>AMD Features2=0x1f <lahf,cmp,svm,extapic,cr8>SVM: NAsids=64
    real memory  = 6442450944 (6144 MB)
    avail memory = 6194679808 (5907 MB)
    Event timer "LAPIC" quality 400
    ACPI APIC Table: <sun   ="" x4200="" m2="">FreeBSD/SMP: Multiprocessor System Detected: 4 CPUs
    FreeBSD/SMP: 2 package(s) x 2 core(s)
    cpu0 (BSP): APIC ID:  0
    cpu1 (AP): APIC ID:  1
    cpu2 (AP): APIC ID:  2
    cpu3 (AP): APIC ID:  3

    The network interface cards available at both nodes are as follows:
    nfe0: NVIDIA nForce4 CK804 MCP9 Networking Adapter
    nfe1: NVIDIA nForce4 CK804 MCP9 Networking Adapter
    em0: Intel(R) PRO/1000 (82546EB)
    em1: Intel(R) PRO/1000 (82546EB)
    lagg0: LACP lagg with em0, em1 & nfe0 attached.

    The pfSense version running at node-1 (the one not yet upgraded) is:
    [2.2.3-RELEASE][root@]/root: uname -a
    FreeBSD  10.1-RELEASE-p13 FreeBSD 10.1-RELEASE-p13 #0 c77d1b2(releng/10.1)-dirty: Tue Jun 23 17:00:47 CDT 2015    root@pfs22-amd64-builder:/usr/obj.amd64/usr/pfSensesrc/src/sys/pfSense_SMP.10  amd64

    The pfSense version running at node-2 (the upgraded one) is:
    [2.3.1-RELEASE][root@]/root: uname -a
    FreeBSD xxxx.aaa.com 10.3-RELEASE-p3 FreeBSD 10.3-RELEASE-p3 #2 1988fec(RELENG_2_3_1): Wed May 25 14:14:46 CDT 2016    root@ce23-amd64-builder:/builder/pfsense-231/tmp/obj/builder/pfsense-231/tmp/FreeBSD-src/sys/pfSense  amd64

    Here are some additional statistics we’ve collected, just in case this may help diagnose:

    Packets with errors at em0 and em1 interfaces
    [2.3.1-RELEASE][root@]/root: sysctl dev.em.0.mac_stats. | grep 'buff|missed'
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.recv_no_buff: 28924720
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.missed_packets: 1109472
    [2.3.1-RELEASE][root@]/root: sysctl dev.em.1.mac_stats. | grep 'buff|missed'
    dev.em.1.mac_stats.recv_no_buff: 2873803
    dev.em.1.mac_stats.missed_packets: 79003

    Networks errors
    [2.3.1-RELEASE][root@]/root: netstat -ihw 1
                input        (Total)          output
      packets  errs idrops      bytes    packets  errs      bytes colls
          52k    30    0        32M        55k    0        36M    0
          46k    0    0        24M        48k    0        30M    0
          50k    64    0        31M        54k    0        35M    0
          45k    35    0        26M        48k    0        31M    0
          48k    19    0        28M        52k    0        33M    0
          45k    2    0        29M        48k    0        33M    0
          50k    0    0        30M        53k    0        35M    0
          50k    0    0        33M        53k    0        37M    0
          43k    9    0        28M        45k    0        32M    0
          53k    12    0        34M        56k    0        39M    0
          50k    0    0        30M        53k    0        34M    0
          44k    0    0        26M        47k    0        30M    0

    Number of interrupts are very high for NICs
    [2.3.1-RELEASE][root@]/root: vmstat -i
    interrupt                          total      rate
    irq44: nfe1                    68575583        318
    irq4: uart0                        2298          0
    irq14: ata0                      143914          0
    irq20: ohci0                          26          0
    irq21: ehci0                          2          0
    irq22: nfe0                    225192527      1044
    irq56: em0                    121230546        562
    irq57: em1                    305005131      1414
    cpu0:timer                    242940061      1126
    irq256: mpt0                      763114          3
    cpu1:timer                      95960989        445
    cpu2:timer                    135271696        627
    cpu3:timer                    133771488        620
    Total                        1328857375      6164

    We have been investigating whether an package of pfsense 2.3.1 or FreeBSD 10.3-release-p3 can cause problems, but we are unable to determine the cause of the problem. Any suggestion?

    Thanks</sun ></lahf,cmp,svm,extapic,cr8></syscall,nx,mmx+,ffxsr,rdtscp,lm,3dnow!+,3dnow!></sse3,cx16></fpu,vme,de,pse,tsc,msr,pae,mce,cx8,apic,sep,mtrr,pge,mca,cmov,pat,pse36,clflush,mmx,fxsr,sse,sse2,htt>

  • The missed packet count and recv_no_buff there is huge. What were the other counters relative to that at the time? What specifically do you have set in loader.conf(.local)?

  • Hi

    This is loader.conf.local config:

    cat /boot/loader.conf.local

    maximum number of interrupts per second on any interrupt level (vmstat -i for

    total rate). If you still see Interrupt Storm detected messages, increase the

    limit to a higher number and look for the culprit.  For 10gig NIC's set to

    9000 and use large MTU. (default 1000)


    Yesterday we reboot the pfsense v2.2.3, and put it in passive, but these are the counters where we forced to pass traffic (and only em0 interface is active):

    sysctl dev.em.0.mac_stats.
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.tso_ctx_fail: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.tso_txd: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_1024_1522: 155735
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_512_1023: 380
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_256_511: 2094
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_128_255: 315482
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_65_127: 1882913
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.tx_frames_64: 71453
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.mcast_pkts_txd: 6253
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.bcast_pkts_txd: 336
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.good_pkts_txd: 2428057
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.total_pkts_txd: 2441152
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.good_octets_txd: 448722915
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.good_octets_recvd: 3137400406
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_1024_1522: 1850689
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_512_1023: 259833
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_256_511: 111457
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_128_255: 83528
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_65_127: 865248
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.rx_frames_64: 137739
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.mcast_pkts_recvd: 1233699
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.bcast_pkts_recvd: 19355
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.good_pkts_recvd: 3308494
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.total_pkts_recvd: 3313623
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.xoff_txd: 9107
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.xoff_recvd: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.xon_txd: 3988
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.xon_recvd: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.coll_ext_errs: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.alignment_errs: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.crc_errs: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.recv_errs: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.recv_jabber: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.recv_oversize: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.recv_fragmented: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.recv_undersize: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.recv_no_buff: 266406
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.missed_packets: 5129
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.defer_count: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.sequence_errors: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.symbol_errors: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.collision_count: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.late_coll: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.multiple_coll: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.single_coll: 0
    dev.em.0.mac_stats.excess_coll: 0

  • Wow that's a really significant percentage of your total traffic ending up no_buff. Next thing I'd try is taking nfe out of the lagg since it's just using em0 anyway, and see what that does. Maybe even leave the lagg with just em0 as the only member. It doesn't look right that nfe0 would have the most load if em0 was the only active interface in the lagg, shouldn't have been any work to do on nfe0 in that case.

  • However, the upgraded node (when running as master), shows a clear network performance degradation: While node-1 (the one still running v2.2.3) can easily forward traffic at +250Mb/s, the alternate node (the one running v2.3) tops at +-80Mb/s.

    Well, how to say it and being friendly any more? If I buy a MS Windows Server 2008 together with hardware
    and now I want to install MS Server 2012 R2 on it, I will find perhaps out that this hardware is not really good
    matching the newer software version. But there in MS Windows based fields we know this and life with this.
    Why not also with FreeBSD and pfSense? As a customer and user of pfSense I can´t say I would be loving to
    see even newer things, such as Intel QuickAssist, AES-NI support and DPDK or netmap-fwd, but I am no really
    willing to buy new hardware or plain upgrading this hardware to the nearly latest or an actual stand. Not really
    nice said, but the true from my point of view on this.

    While diagnosing the issue we’ve found node running pfSense v2.3 to have a high load under such a ‘low’ traffic (ie. 80Mb/s), and high CPU usage by network drivers, as show below:

    Perhaps, only perhaps I mean, they are working on newer drivers or make older drivers better matching
    with the actual new hardware, but then often compared to older hardware it is then not really a gain and
    playing well together. Perhaps you could think about a newer board, stronger CPU or SoC and/or more or
    faster RAM? I really don´t know it and I am not a professional likes cmb and others, but often new hardware
    does the trick for many years, let us say the next 5 or 6 years.

    Any suggestion?

    I will be truly to you, I would stay with the 64Bit version 2.2.6, but even this is related to all circumstances
    and seen affects in each pfSense system. Some are really hard likes your 250Mbs/80Mbs, but also other strange
    points would let me say wait since pfSense let us say 2.4 or higher. And if this would be not really better going
    then for you and your company I would really urgent think about a hardware upgrade.

Log in to reply