<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=utf-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<p>Hello Yaniv.</p>
<p>It also looks to me initially that for 1Gbps multi-queue would
not be necessary, however the Virtual Machine is relatively busy
where the CPU necessary to process it may (or not) be competing
with the processes running on in the guest.</p>
<p>The network is as following: 3 x 1 Gb interfaces bonded together
with layer2+3 has algorithm where the VMs connect to the outside
world.<br>
vNIC1 and vNIC2 in the VMs are the same VirtIO NIC types. These
vNICs are connected to the same VLAN and they are both able to
output 1Gbps throughput each at the same time in iperf tests as
the bond below has 3Gb capacity.</p>
<p>Please note something interesting I mentioned previously: All
traffic currently goes in and out via vNIC1 which is showing
packet loss (3% to 10%) on the tests conducted. NIC2 has zero
traffic and if the same tests are conducted against it shows 0%
packets loss.<br>
At first impression if it was something related to the bond or
even to the physical NICs on the Host it should show packet loss
for ANY of the vNICs as the traffic flows through the same
physical NIC and bond, but is not the case.</p>
<p>This is the qemu-kvm command the Host is executing:<br>
/usr/libexec/qemu-kvm -name
guest=VM_NAME_REPLACED,debug-threads=on -S -object
secret,id=masterKey0,format=raw,file=/var/lib/libvirt/qemu/domain-6-VM_NAME_REPLACED/master-key.aes
-machine pc-i440fx-rhel7.3.0,accel=kvm,usb=off -cpu SandyBridge -m
4096 -realtime mlock=off -smp
4,maxcpus=16,sockets=16,cores=1,threads=1 -numa
node,nodeid=0,cpus=0-3,mem=4096 -uuid
57ffc2ed-fec5-47d6-bfb1-60c728737bd2 -smbios
type=1,manufacturer=oVirt,product=oVirt
Node,version=7-3.1611.el7.centos,serial=4C4C4544-0043-5610-804B-B1C04F4E3232,uuid=57ffc2ed-fec5-47d6-bfb1-60c728737bd2
-no-user-config -nodefaults -chardev
socket,id=charmonitor,path=/var/lib/libvirt/qemu/domain-6-VM_NAME_REPLACED/monitor.sock,server,nowait
-mon chardev=charmonitor,id=monitor,mode=control -rtc
base=2017-03-17T01:12:39,driftfix=slew -global
kvm-pit.lost_tick_policy=discard -no-hpet -no-shutdown -boot
strict=on -device piix3-usb-uhci,id=usb,bus=pci.0,addr=0x1.0x2
-device virtio-scsi-pci,id=scsi0,bus=pci.0,addr=0x7 -device
virtio-serial-pci,id=virtio-serial0,max_ports=16,bus=pci.0,addr=0x5
-drive if=none,id=drive-ide0-1-0,readonly=on -device
ide-cd,bus=ide.1,unit=0,drive=drive-ide0-1-0,id=ide0-1-0 -drive
file=/rhev/data-center/2325e1a4-c702-469c-82eb-ff43baa06d44/8dcd90f4-c0f0-47db-be39-5b49685acc04/images/ebe10e75-799a-439e-bc52-551b894c34fa/1a73cd53-0e51-4e49-8631-38cf571f6bb9,format=qcow2,if=none,id=drive-scsi0-0-0-0,serial=ebe10e75-799a-439e-bc52-551b894c34fa,cache=none,werror=stop,rerror=stop,aio=native
-device
scsi-hd,bus=scsi0.0,channel=0,scsi-id=0,lun=0,drive=drive-scsi0-0-0-0,id=scsi0-0-0-0,bootindex=1
-drive
file=/rhev/data-center/2325e1a4-c702-469c-82eb-ff43baa06d44/8dcd90f4-c0f0-47db-be39-5b49685acc04/images/db401b27-006d-494c-a1ee-1d37810710c8/664cffe6-52f8-429d-8bb9-2f43fa7a468f,format=qcow2,if=none,id=drive-scsi0-0-0-1,serial=db401b27-006d-494c-a1ee-1d37810710c8,cache=none,werror=stop,rerror=stop,aio=native
-device
scsi-hd,bus=scsi0.0,channel=0,scsi-id=0,lun=1,drive=drive-scsi0-0-0-1,id=scsi0-0-0-1
-netdev tap,fd=33,id=hostnet0,vhost=on,vhostfd=36 -device
virtio-net-pci,netdev=hostnet0,id=net0,mac=00:1a:4a:16:01:60,bus=pci.0,addr=0x3
-netdev tap,fd=37,id=hostnet1,vhost=on,vhostfd=38 -device
virtio-net-pci,netdev=hostnet1,id=net1,mac=00:1a:4a:16:01:61,bus=pci.0,addr=0x4
-chardev
socket,id=charchannel0,path=/var/lib/libvirt/qemu/channels/57ffc2ed-fec5-47d6-bfb1-60c728737bd2.com.redhat.rhevm.vdsm,server,nowait
-device
virtserialport,bus=virtio-serial0.0,nr=1,chardev=charchannel0,id=channel0,name=com.redhat.rhevm.vdsm
-chardev
socket,id=charchannel1,path=/var/lib/libvirt/qemu/channels/57ffc2ed-fec5-47d6-bfb1-60c728737bd2.org.qemu.guest_agent.0,server,nowait
-device
virtserialport,bus=virtio-serial0.0,nr=2,chardev=charchannel1,id=channel1,name=org.qemu.guest_agent.0
-chardev spicevmc,id=charchannel2,name=vdagent -device
virtserialport,bus=virtio-serial0.0,nr=3,chardev=charchannel2,id=channel2,name=com.redhat.spice.0
-vnc 192.168.100.19:2,password -k pt-br -spice
tls-port=5903,addr=192.168.100.19,x509-dir=/etc/pki/vdsm/libvirt-spice,tls-channel=default,tls-channel=main,tls-channel=display,tls-channel=inputs,tls-channel=cursor,tls-channel=playback,tls-channel=record,tls-channel=smartcard,tls-channel=usbredir,seamless-migration=on
-k pt-br -device
qxl-vga,id=video0,ram_size=67108864,vram_size=33554432,vram64_size_mb=0,vgamem_mb=16,bus=pci.0,addr=0x2
-incoming defer -device
virtio-balloon-pci,id=balloon0,bus=pci.0,addr=0x6 -object
rng-random,id=objrng0,filename=/dev/urandom -device
virtio-rng-pci,rng=objrng0,id=rng0,bus=pci.0,addr=0x8 -msg
timestamp=on<br>
</p>
<p>Load in the VM is relatively high (20 to 30) and CPU usage is
between 50% to 60% with eventual peaks of 100% in one of the
vCPUs. There is a lot of processes running in the VM similar to
Web Servers which is using this amount of CPU.</p>
<p>Only guess I could have so far is that traffic on NIC1 is being
handeled by one of the vCPUs which eventually get 100% due to some
of the processes while traffic on NIC2 is handled by another vCPU
which is not that busy and explains the 0% packet loss. BUT,
should VirtIO vNIC use CPU from within the Guest ?<br>
Does it make any sense ?</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<p>Fernando<br>
</p>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 18/03/2017 12:53, Yaniv Kaul wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAJgorsaK0pKUvkzecg+oGYwHCrw+essr8jiGk3cGPrzO9PGrqw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr"><br>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 6:11 PM,
FERNANDO FREDIANI <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:fernando.frediani@upx.com" target="_blank">fernando.frediani@upx.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Hello all.<br>
<br>
</div>
I have a peculiar problem here which
perhaps others may have had or know about
and can advise.<br>
<br>
</div>
I have Virtual Machine with 2 VirtIO NICs.
This VM serves around 1Gbps of traffic with
thousands of clients connecting to it. When
I do a packet loss test to the IP pinned to
NIC1 it varies from 3% to 10% of packet
loss. When I run the same test on NIC2 the
packet loss is consistently 0%.<br>
<br>
</div>
From what I gather I may have something to do
with possible lack of Multi Queu VirtIO where
NIC1 is managed by a single CPU which might be
hitting 100% and causing this packet loss.<br>
<br>
</div>
Looking at this reference (<a
moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/MQ_virtio_net"
target="_blank">https://fedoraproject.org/<wbr>wiki/Features/MQ_virtio_net</a>)
I see one way to test it is start the VM with 4
queues (for example), but checking on the
qemu-kvm process I don't see option present. Any
way I can force it from the Engine ?<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I don't see a need for multi-queue for 1Gbps.</div>
<div>Can you share the host statistics, the network
configuration, the qemu-kvm command line, etc.?</div>
<div>What is the difference between NIC1 and NIC2, in the
way they are connected to the outside world?</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
This other reference (<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.linux-kvm.org/page/Multiqueue#Enable_MQ_feature"
target="_blank">https://www.linux-kvm.org/<wbr>page/Multiqueue#Enable_MQ_<wbr>feature</a>)
points to the same direction about starting the VM
with queues=N<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Also trying to increase the TX ring buffer
within the guest with ethtool -g eth0 is not
possible.<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
Oh, by the way, the Load on the VM is significantly
high despite the CPU usage isn't above 50% - 60% in
average.<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Load = latest 'top' results? Vs. CPU usage? Can mean a
lot of processes waiting for CPU and doing very little -
typical for web servers, for example. What is occupying
the CPU?</div>
<div>Y.</div>
<div> </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
Thanks<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
</font></span></div>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">Fernando<br>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</font></span></div>
<br>
______________________________<wbr>_________________<br>
Users mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:Users@ovirt.org">Users@ovirt.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/users"
rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.ovirt.org/<wbr>mailman/listinfo/users</a><br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>