NAS performance with kernel 3.19.0

NAS

 17  22819

Jan 20, 2015 13:49

Edited by tkaiser at Wed Feb 11, 2015 03:43

Based on Igor's image build scripts I started with Kernel 3.19.0-rc5 and Debian Wheezy. Currently the cpufreq stuff isn't working in 3.19 and there's a lot of related work pending or will be available later with kernel 3.20. Since I tried to maximize performance I tried a few things, especially clock the CPU cores as high as possible (the default cpufreq in mainline is just 912 MHz!)

From Igor's build directory I patched output/u-boot/include/configs/sun7i.h from 912 MHz to 1056 MHz (everything above failed in my limited tests). Setting the cpufreq in u-boot is currently the only method supported:

#define CONFIG_CLK_FULL_SPEED 1056000000

Copy the Code

And I modified the kernel config since it is known that some settings positively influence SMP performance on ARM (compare with http://forum.lemaker.org/thread-7102-1-1.html). So I set in lib/config/linux-sunxi-next.config:

CONFIG_SCHED_MC=y
CONFIG_SCHED_SMT=y

Copy the Code

(CONFIG_HZ_100=y and CONFIG_HZ=100 were already set before).

Isolated network tests / iperf throughput:

Tests without further tuning (only eth0 IRQs handled by CPU1 and slight 'overclocking' to 1056MHz...

OS X --> BPi:

root@bananapi:~# iperf -s
------------------------------------------------------------
Server listening on TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 85.3 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 4] local 192.168.83.44 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.247 port 63446
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.09 GBytes 934 Mbits/sec
[ 5] local 192.168.83.44 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.247 port 63447
[ 5] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.10 GBytes 940 Mbits/sec
[ 4] local 192.168.83.44 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.247 port 63448
[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.10 GBytes 940 Mbits/sec
[ 5] local 192.168.83.44 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.247 port 63449
[ 5] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.10 GBytes 941 Mbits/sec
[ 4] local 192.168.83.44 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.247 port 63450
[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 1.09 GBytes 939 Mbits/sec

Copy the Code

BPi --> OS X:

mountain-mini:~ admin$ iperf -s
------------------------------------------------------------
Server listening on TCP port 5001
TCP window size: 128 KByte (default)
------------------------------------------------------------
[ 4] local 192.168.83.247 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.44 port 45648
[ ID] Interval Transfer Bandwidth
[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 689 MBytes 577 Mbits/sec
[ 4] local 192.168.83.247 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.44 port 45649
[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 800 MBytes 671 Mbits/sec
[ 4] local 192.168.83.247 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.44 port 45650
[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 803 MBytes 673 Mbits/sec
[ 4] local 192.168.83.247 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.44 port 45651
[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 806 MBytes 676 Mbits/sec
[ 4] local 192.168.83.247 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.44 port 45652
[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 798 MBytes 669 Mbits/sec

Copy the Code

SATA / iozone results:

In 3.19 it's no longer necessary to patch sunxi_ahci to work either with or without a port multiplier.

EDIT: That's not true. I had to patch the kernel (unset AHCI_HFLAG_NO_PMP) and unfortunately my JMB321 seems to not like my SSD that much. Regardless on which PM port I connect the SSD the negotiation will always just be SATA 1.0 (1.5 Gbps). That's also the explanation for the decreased read throughput.

I tested with a JMB321 in between Banana and the EVO 840:

KB reclen write rewrite read reread
2048000 4 42281 42694 137476 137470
2048000 32 42025 42261 137427 137461
2048000 512 41590 41938 135917 136992
2048000 16384 41495 42008 136863 136903

Copy the Code

It makes no difference whether CONFIG_SCHED_MC=y and CONFIG_SCHED_SMT=y are set or not. Different situation when there's no PM as bottleneck:

"CONFIG_SCHED_MC not set" and CONFIG_SCHED_SMT not set":

KB reclen write rewrite read reread
2048000 4 43053 43643 202636 203209
2048000 32 42743 42949 184831 183612
2048000 512 41774 42533 174186 175606
2048000 16384 41897 42500 175786 172778

Copy the Code

CONFIG_SCHED_MC=y and CONFIG_SCHED_SMT=y:

KB reclen write rewrite read reread
2048000 4 44413 44092 212359 212756
2048000 32 44078 44115 191354 192068
2048000 512 44167 43707 184329 184778
2048000 16384 43238 43798 185875 186162

Copy the Code

Combined tests / LanTest results:

The tweaked kernel settings seem to provide another few MB/sec due to higher SATA throughput. Interestingly the situation changes when one uses the '10 GBit Ethernet settings' (larger test files and 1024K blocksize instead of 128K as before):

Looks promising especially when you have in mind that it will be possible to clock the BPi with 1200 MHz again sooner or later (and then throughput will increase again a little blt).

Favorite thread  Rate :  Share to   

 Use magic 

tkaiser

Jan 20, 2015 14:59

Some final words regarding this test: I removed the PM again and let Igor's image install on the SSD (/root/nand-sata-install.sh) and applied some network tuning:

sysctl -w net/core/rmem_max=8738000
sysctl -w net/core/wmem_max=6553600
sysctl -w net/ipv4/tcp_rmem="8192 873800 8738000"
sysctl -w net/ipv4/tcp_wmem="4096 655360 6553600"
sysctl -w vm/min_free_kbytes=65536
sysctl -w net.ipv4.tcp_window_scaling=1
sysctl -w net.ipv4.tcp_timestamps=1
sysctl -w net.ipv4.tcp_sack=1
sysctl -w net.ipv4.tcp_no_metrics_save=1

Copy the Code

And I assigned the 3 processes serving my Mac (cnid_metad, cnid_dbd and the afpd serving my session) to CPU 0 (if you would use Windows/Samba this would apply to the smbd process serving your session instead):

for i in 2488 2494 2495 ; do taskset -p 01 $i ; done

Copy the Code

Now it looks like this (still with just 1056 MHz):

And with 3000M filesize and 1024K blocksize:

The measured values stayed pretty stable during all 5 test runs. Some explanations to the LanTest parameters as well as their relation to 'real world scenarios' can be found here: http://www.helios.de/viewart-de.html?id=1711

 Use magic 

tkaiser

Feb 07, 2015 05:19

Edited by tkaiser at Mon Feb 9, 2015 05:52

I made another test with Igor's build scripts, 3.19.0-rc6, different kernel sources (using Maxime Ripard's sunxi-next branch instead of 'official' mainline), slightly different kernel config, different u-boot (using mainline instead of Robert C. Nelson's) but still 1056Mhz instead of the default 912Mhz.

SATA throughput measured with iozone is a bit slower and this also applies to network throughput measured with iperf after the usual TCP/IP tuning outlined above:

The LanTest results look ok but the orange triangles indicate that there's something wrong (sequential writes between 24.4 MB/s min. and 38.2 MB/s max. --> too much difference) but it's too early to do serious benchmarking because I changed another thing too: the board itself

(it's a LinkSprite pcDuino3 Nano comparable to the original Banana Pi. I applied Adam Sampson's patches to u-boot and kernel sources and modified Igor's scripts a bit. Two problems remain: currently broken mainline u-boot not able to read/parse boot.scr and maybe the DRAM clock frequency that Adam set to 408 -- will try with 480 later)

BTW: The pcDuino's SATA power connector is compatible with the cubie's but not the Pi. So SATA/power cables made for pcDuino or cubieboards must not be used with Banana/Orange Pi and vice versa!

 Use magic 

tkaiser

Feb 07, 2015 08:12

Hmm... I increased DRAM clock to 480: http://pastebin.com/kCusGxQm

And while it seems to be stable unfortunately the network throughput doesn't increase (compared to the BPi it's way slower). I've done some standard iperf tests:

OS X --> pcDuino

[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 570 MBytes 478 Mbits/sec
[ 4] local 192.168.83.74 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.73 port 45115
[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 594 MBytes 498 Mbits/sec
[ 4] local 192.168.83.74 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.73 port 45116
[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 840 MBytes 704 Mbits/sec
[ 4] local 192.168.83.74 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.73 port 45117
[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 611 MBytes 512 Mbits/sec
[ 4] local 192.168.83.74 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.73 port 45118
[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 604 MBytes 506 Mbits/sec
[ 4] local 192.168.83.74 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.73 port 45119
[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 716 MBytes 600 Mbits/sec

Copy the Code

pcDuino --> OS X

[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 763 MBytes 640 Mbits/sec
[ 5] local 192.168.83.73 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.74 port 49502
[ 5] 0.0-10.0 sec 389 MBytes 326 Mbits/sec
[ 4] local 192.168.83.73 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.74 port 49503
[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 400 MBytes 336 Mbits/sec
[ 5] local 192.168.83.73 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.74 port 49505
[ 5] 0.0-10.0 sec 397 MBytes 333 Mbits/sec
[ 4] local 192.168.83.73 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.74 port 49507
[ 4] 0.0-10.0 sec 834 MBytes 699 Mbits/sec
[ 5] local 192.168.83.73 port 5001 connected with 192.168.83.74 port 49509
[ 5] 0.0-10.0 sec 788 MBytes 661 Mbits/sec

Copy the Code

And did two times iozone tests on the SATA SSD (using "iozone -a -g 2000m -s 2000m -i 0 -i 1 -r${recordsize}k" with different record sizes):

2048000 4 41588 47520 218494 219156
2048000 4 41247 48200 218171 219174
2048000 32 40930 48094 196609 197547
2048000 32 41417 47526 198031 198522
2048000 512 40384 47232 192915 192401
2048000 512 42114 46416 192788 193241
2048000 16384 46025 44079 195094 195918
2048000 16384 43941 46504 222510 223501

Copy the Code

LanTest results look good except of write performance. Here the network throughput seems to be the bottleneck:

 Use magic 

rutierut

Feb 09, 2015 05:12

hmmm nice results

 Use magic 

tkaiser

Feb 09, 2015 05:45

rutierut replied at Mon Feb 9, 2015 05:12
hmmm nice results

Unfortunately partly wrong or let's better say: not comparable directly. I made another set of iperf tests with the same Mac I used before to test against Banana Pi and was also able to get ~940 Mbits/sec in one and above 750 Mbits/sec in the other direction. So I have to further investigate what's wrong here, since I always get slower results with a machine connected directly to the same switch (HP 1810-8G v2) as the BPi/pcDuino compared to the superiour results the other machine achieves that is three hops (switches) away.

Another interesting thing was to measure the influence of DRAM clock. I tested the pcDuino with both 408MHz DRAM clock as well as 480MHz. Always two times using "iozone -a -g 2000m -s 2000m -i 0 -i 1 -r${recordsize}k":

With 480 Mhz DRAM and 1056MHz cpufreq:

2048000 4 41588 47520 218494 219156
2048000 4 41247 48200 218171 219174
2048000 32 40930 48094 196609 197547
2048000 32 41417 47526 198031 198522
2048000 512 40384 47232 192915 192401
2048000 512 42114 46416 192788 193241
2048000 16384 46025 44079 195094 195918
2048000 16384 43941 46504 222510 223501

Copy the Code

With just 408 Mhz DRAM and also 1056MHz cpufreq:

2048000 4 37368 43087 206034 208048
2048000 4 41708 43635 207130 207796
2048000 32 42540 42384 180647 179998
2048000 32 40230 42918 183590 184689
2048000 512 42601 42131 175569 175094
2048000 512 40822 43882 177408 176607
2048000 16384 38623 43127 203863 203676
2048000 16384 43976 44185 178184 178290

Copy the Code

But since figuring out at which frequency the DRAM still works reliable requires a lot of efforts I would stay with the manufacturer's defaults (408MHz on the pcDuino3 nano, 432MHz on Banana Pi/Pro)

 Use magic 