Re: [PATCH net-next v4 00/18] net/smc: implement virtual ISM extension and loopback-ism

[Wen Gu]

On 2023/10/5 16:21, Niklas Schnelle wrote:

> Hi Wen Gu,
>
> I've been trying out your series with iperf3, qperf, and uperf on
> s390x. I'm using network namespaces with a ConnectX VF from the same
> card in each namespace for the initial TCP/IP connection i.e. initially
> it goes out to a real NIC even if that can switch internally. All of
> these look great for streaming workloads both in terms of performance
> and stability. With a Connect-Request-Response workload and uperf
> however I've run into issues. The test configuration I use is as
> follows:
>
> Client Command:
>
> # host=$ip_server ip netns exec client smc_run uperf -m tcp_crr.xml
>
> Server Command:
>
> # ip netns exec server smc_run uperf -s &> /dev/null
>
> Uperf tcp_crr.xml:
>
> <?xml version="1.0"?>
> <profile name="TCP_CRR">
>          <group nthreads="12">
>                  <transaction duration="120">
>                          <flowop type="connect" options="remotehost=$host protocol=tcp" />
>                          <flowop type="write" options="size=200"/>
>                          <flowop type="read" options="size=1000"/>
>                          <flowop type="disconnect" />
>                  </transaction>
>          </group>
> </profile>
>
> The workload first runs fine but then after about 4 GB of data
> transferred fails with "Connection refused" and "Connection reset by
> peer" errors. The failure is not permanent however and re-running
> the streaming workloads run fine again (with both uperf server and
> client restarted). So I suspect something gets stuck in either the
> client or server sockets. The same workload runs fine with TCP/IP of
> course.
>
> Thanks,
> Niklas

Hi Niklas,

Thank you very much for the test. With the test example you provided, I've
reproduced the issue in my VM. And moreover, sometimes the test complains
with 'Error saying goodbye with <ip>'

I'll figure out what's going on here.

Thanks!
Wen Gu