-Performance Test Methodology
-============================
-Throughput
-----------
+.. _test_methodology:
-Packet and bandwidth throughput are measured in accordance with
-:rfc:`2544`, using FD.io CSIT Multiple Loss Ratio search (MLRsearch), an
-optimized binary search algorithm, that measures SUT/DUT throughput at
-different Packet Loss Ratio (PLR) values.
+Test Methodology
+================
+
+VPP Forwarding Modes
+--------------------
+
+VPP is tested in a number of L2 and IP packet lookup and forwarding
+modes. Within each mode baseline and scale tests are executed, the
+latter with varying number of lookup entries.
+
+L2 Ethernet Switching
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+VPP is tested in three L2 forwarding modes:
+
+- *l2patch*: L2 patch, the fastest point-to-point L2 path that loops
+ packets between two interfaces without any Ethernet frame checks or
+ lookups.
+- *l2xc*: L2 cross-connect, point-to-point L2 path with all Ethernet
+ frame checks, but no MAC learning and no MAC lookup.
+- *l2bd*: L2 bridge-domain, multipoint-to-multipoint L2 path with all
+ Ethernet frame checks, with MAC learning (unless static MACs are used)
+ and MAC lookup.
+
+l2bd tests are executed in baseline and scale configurations:
+
+- *l2bdbase*: low number of L2 flows (253 per direction) is switched by
+ VPP. They drive the content of MAC FIB size (506 total MAC entries).
+ Both source and destination MAC addresses are incremented on a packet
+ by packet basis.
+
+- *l2bdscale*: high number of L2 flows is switched by VPP. Tested MAC
+ FIB sizes include: i) 10k (5k unique flows per direction), ii) 100k
+ (2x 50k flows) and iii) 1M (2x 500k). Both source and destination MAC
+ addresses are incremented on a packet by packet basis, ensuring new
+ entries are learn refreshed and looked up at every packet, making it
+ the worst case scenario.
+
+Ethernet wire encapsulations tested include: untagged, dot1q, dot1ad.
+
+IPv4 Routing
+~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+IPv4 routing tests are executed in baseline and scale configurations:
+
+- *ip4base*: low number of IPv4 flows (253 per direction) is routed by
+ VPP. They drive the content of IPv4 FIB size (506 total /32 prefixes).
+ Destination IPv4 addresses are incremented on a packet by packet
+ basis.
+
+- *ip4scale*: high number of IPv4 flows is routed by VPP. Tested IPv4
+ FIB sizes of /32 prefixes include: i) 20k (10k unique flows per
+ direction), ii) 200k (2x 100k flows) and iii) 2M (2x 1M). Destination
+ IPv4 addresses are incremented on a packet by packet basis, ensuring
+ new FIB entries are looked up at every packet, making it the worst
+ case scenario.
+
+IPv6 Routing
+~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+IPv6 routing tests are executed in baseline and scale configurations:
+
+- *ip6base*: low number of IPv6 flows (253 per direction) is routed by
+ VPP. They drive the content of IPv6 FIB size (506 total /128 prefixes).
+ Destination IPv6 addresses are incremented on a packet by packet
+ basis.
+
+- *ip6scale*: high number of IPv6 flows is routed by VPP. Tested IPv6
+ FIB sizes of /128 prefixes include: i) 20k (10k unique flows per
+ direction), ii) 200k (2x 100k flows) and iii) 2M (2x 1M). Destination
+ IPv6 addresses are incremented on a packet by packet basis, ensuring
+ new FIB entries are looked up at every packet, making it the worst
+ case scenario.
+
+SRv6 Routing
+~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+SRv6 routing tests are executed in a number of baseline configurations,
+in each case SR policy and steering policy are configured for one
+direction and one (or two) SR behaviours (functions) in the other
+directions:
+
+- *srv6enc1sid*: One SID (no SRH present), one SR function - End.
+- *srv6enc2sids*: Two SIDs (SRH present), two SR functions - End and
+ End.DX6.
+- *srv6enc2sids-nodecaps*: Two SIDs (SRH present) without decapsulation,
+ one SR function - End.
+- *srv6proxy-dyn*: Dynamic SRv6 proxy, one SR function - End.AD.
+- *srv6proxy-masq*: Masquerading SRv6 proxy, one SR function - End.AM.
+- *srv6proxy-stat*: Static SRv6 proxy, one SR function - End.AS.
+
+In all listed cases low number of IPv6 flows (253 per direction) is
+routed by VPP.
+
+Tunnel Encapsulations
+---------------------
+
+Tunnel encapsulations testing is grouped based on the type of outer
+header: IPv4 or IPv6.
+
+IPv4 Tunnels
+~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+VPP is tested in the following IPv4 tunnel baseline configurations:
+
+- *ip4vxlan-l2bdbase*: VXLAN over IPv4 tunnels with L2 bridge-domain MAC
+ switching.
+- *ip4vxlan-l2xcbase*: VXLAN over IPv4 tunnels with L2 cross-connect.
+- *ip4lispip4-ip4base*: LISP over IPv4 tunnels with IPv4 routing.
+- *ip4lispip6-ip6base*: LISP over IPv4 tunnels with IPv6 routing.
+
+In all cases listed above low number of MAC, IPv4, IPv6 flows (253 per
+direction) is switched or routed by VPP.
+
+In addition selected IPv4 tunnels are tested at scale:
+
+- *dot1q--ip4vxlanscale-l2bd*: VXLAN over IPv4 tunnels with L2 bridge-
+ domain MAC switching, with scaled up dot1q VLANs (10, 100, 1k),
+ mapped to scaled up L2 bridge-domains (10, 100, 1k), that are in turn
+ mapped to (10, 100, 1k) VXLAN tunnels. 64.5k flows are transmitted per
+ direction.
+
+IPv6 Tunnels
+~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+VPP is tested in the following IPv6 tunnel baseline configurations:
+
+- *ip6lispip4-ip4base*: LISP over IPv4 tunnels with IPv4 routing.
+- *ip6lispip6-ip6base*: LISP over IPv4 tunnels with IPv6 routing.
+
+In all cases listed above low number of IPv4, IPv6 flows (253 per
+direction) is routed by VPP.
+
+VPP Features
+------------
+
+VPP is tested in a number of data plane feature configurations across
+different forwarding modes. Following sections list features tested.
+
+ACL Security-Groups
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+Both stateless and stateful access control lists (ACL), also known as
+security-groups, are supported by VPP.
+
+Following ACL configurations are tested for MAC switching with L2
+bridge-domains:
+
+- *l2bdbasemaclrn-iacl{E}sl-{F}flows*: Input stateless ACL, with {E}
+ entries and {F} flows.
+- *l2bdbasemaclrn-oacl{E}sl-{F}flows*: Output stateless ACL, with {E}
+ entries and {F} flows.
+- *l2bdbasemaclrn-iacl{E}sf-{F}flows*: Input stateful ACL, with {E}
+ entries and {F} flows.
+- *l2bdbasemaclrn-oacl{E}sf-{F}flows*: Output stateful ACL, with {E}
+ entries and {F} flows.
+
+Following ACL configurations are tested with IPv4 routing:
+
+- *ip4base-iacl{E}sl-{F}flows*: Input stateless ACL, with {E} entries
+ and {F} flows.
+- *ip4base-oacl{E}sl-{F}flows*: Output stateless ACL, with {E} entries
+ and {F} flows.
+- *ip4base-iacl{E}sf-{F}flows*: Input stateful ACL, with {E} entries and
+ {F} flows.
+- *ip4base-oacl{E}sf-{F}flows*: Output stateful ACL, with {E} entries
+ and {F} flows.
+
+ACL tests are executed with the following combinations of ACL entries
+and number of flows:
+
+- ACL entry definitions
+
+ - flow non-matching deny entry: (src-ip4, dst-ip4, src-port, dst-port).
+ - flow matching permit ACL entry: (src-ip4, dst-ip4).
+
+- {E} - number of non-matching deny ACL entries, {E} = [1, 10, 50].
+- {F} - number of UDP flows with different tuple (src-ip4, dst-ip4,
+ src-port, dst-port), {F} = [100, 10k, 100k].
+- All {E}x{F} combinations are tested per ACL type, total of 9.
+
+ACL MAC-IP
+~~~~~~~~~~
+
+MAC-IP binding ACLs are tested for MAC switching with L2 bridge-domains:
+
+- *l2bdbasemaclrn-macip-iacl{E}sl-{F}flows*: Input stateless ACL, with
+ {E} entries and {F} flows.
+
+MAC-IP ACL tests are executed with the following combinations of ACL
+entries and number of flows:
+
+- ACL entry definitions
+
+ - flow non-matching deny entry: (dst-ip4, dst-mac, bit-mask)
+ - flow matching permit ACL entry: (dst-ip4, dst-mac, bit-mask)
+
+- {E} - number of non-matching deny ACL entries, {E} = [1, 10, 50]
+- {F} - number of UDP flows with different tuple (dst-ip4, dst-mac),
+ {F} = [100, 10k, 100k]
+- All {E}x{F} combinations are tested per ACL type, total of 9.
+
+NAT44
+~~~~~
+
+NAT44 is tested in baseline and scale configurations with IPv4 routing:
+
+- *ip4base-nat44*: baseline test with single NAT entry (addr, port),
+ single UDP flow.
+- *ip4base-udpsrcscale{U}-nat44*: baseline test with {U} NAT entries
+ (addr, {U}ports), {U}=15.
+- *ip4scale{R}-udpsrcscale{U}-nat44*: scale tests with {R}*{U} NAT
+ entries ({R}addr, {U}ports), {R}=[100, 1k, 2k, 4k], {U}=15.
+
+Data Plane Throughput
+---------------------
+
+Network data plane packet and bandwidth throughput are measured in
+accordance with :rfc:`2544`, using FD.io CSIT Multiple Loss Ratio search
+(MLRsearch), an optimized throughput search algorithm, that measures
+SUT/DUT packet throughput rates at different Packet Loss Ratio (PLR)
+values.
Following MLRsearch values are measured across a range of L2 frame sizes
and reported:
-- **Non Drop Rate (NDR)**: packet and bandwidth throughput at PLR=0%.
+- NON DROP RATE (NDR): packet and bandwidth throughput at PLR=0%.
- **Aggregate packet rate**: NDR_LOWER <bi-directional packet rate>
pps.
- **Aggregate bandwidth rate**: NDR_LOWER <bi-directional bandwidth
rate> Gbps.
-- **Partial Drop Rate (PDR)**: packet and bandwidth throughput at
- PLR=0.5%.
+- PARTIAL DROP RATE (PDR): packet and bandwidth throughput at PLR=0.5%.
- **Aggregate packet rate**: PDR_LOWER <bi-directional packet rate>
pps.
NDR and PDR are measured for the following L2 frame sizes (untagged
Ethernet):
-- IPv4 payload: 64B, IMIX_v4_1 (28x64B, 16x570B, 4x1518B), 1518B, 9000B.
-- IPv6 payload: 78B, 1518B, 9000B.
+- IPv4 payload: 64B, IMIX (28x64B, 16x570B, 4x1518B), 1518B, 9000B.
+- IPv6 payload: 78B, IMIX (28x78B, 16x570B, 4x1518B), 1518B, 9000B.
All rates are reported from external Traffic Generator perspective.
-Description of MLRsearch algorithm is provided in
-:ref:`mlrsearch_algorithm`.
-
-Maximum Receive Rate MRR
-------------------------
+.. _mlrsearch_algorithm:
+
+MLRsearch Tests
+---------------
+
+Multiple Loss Rate search (MLRsearch) tests use new search algorithm
+implemented in FD.io CSIT project. MLRsearch discovers multiple packet
+throughput rates in a single search, with each rate associated with a
+distinct Packet Loss Ratio (PLR) criteria. MLRsearch is being
+standardized in IETF with `draft-vpolak-mkonstan-mlrsearch-XX
+<https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-vpolak-mkonstan-mlrsearch-00>`_.
+
+Two throughput measurements used in FD.io CSIT are Non-Drop Rate (NDR,
+with zero packet loss, PLR=0) and Partial Drop Rate (PDR, with packet
+loss rate not greater than the configured non-zero PLR). MLRsearch
+discovers NDR and PDR in a single pass reducing required execution time
+compared to separate binary searches for NDR and PDR. MLRsearch reduces
+execution time even further by relying on shorter trial durations
+of intermediate steps, with only the final measurements
+conducted at the specified final trial duration.
+This results in the shorter overall search
+execution time when compared to a standard NDR/PDR binary search,
+while guaranteeing the same or similar results.
+
+If needed, MLRsearch can be easily adopted to discover more throughput rates
+with different pre-defined PLRs.
+
+.. Note:: All throughput rates are *always* bi-directional
+ aggregates of two equal (symmetric) uni-directional packet rates
+ received and reported by an external traffic generator.
+
+Overview
+~~~~~~~~
+
+The main properties of MLRsearch:
+
+- MLRsearch is a duration aware multi-phase multi-rate search algorithm.
+
+ - Initial phase determines promising starting interval for the search.
+ - Intermediate phases progress towards defined final search criteria.
+ - Final phase executes measurements according to the final search
+ criteria.
+
+- *Initial phase*:
+
+ - Uses link rate as a starting transmit rate and discovers the Maximum
+ Receive Rate (MRR) used as an input to the first intermediate phase.
+
+- *Intermediate phases*:
+
+ - Start with initial trial duration (in the first phase) and converge
+ geometrically towards the final trial duration (in the final phase).
+ - Track two values for NDR and two for PDR.
+
+ - The values are called (NDR or PDR) lower_bound and upper_bound.
+ - Each value comes from a specific trial measurement
+ (most recent for that transmit rate),
+ and as such the value is associated with that measurement's duration and loss.
+ - A bound can be invalid, for example if NDR lower_bound
+ has been measured with nonzero loss.
+ - Invalid bounds are not real boundaries for the searched value,
+ but are needed to track interval widths.
+ - Valid bounds are real boundaries for the searched value.
+ - Each non-initial phase ends with all bounds valid.
+
+ - Start with a large (lower_bound, upper_bound) interval width and
+ geometrically converge towards the width goal (measurement resolution)
+ of the phase. Each phase halves the previous width goal.
+ - Use internal and external searches:
+
+ - External search - measures at transmit rates outside the (lower_bound,
+ upper_bound) interval. Activated when a bound is invalid,
+ to search for a new valid bound by doubling the interval width.
+ It is a variant of `exponential search`_.
+ - Internal search - `binary search`_, measures at transmit rates within the
+ (lower_bound, upper_bound) valid interval, halving the interval width.
+
+- *Final phase* is executed with the final test trial duration, and the final
+ width goal that determines resolution of the overall search.
+ Intermediate phases together with the final phase are called non-initial phases.
+
+The main benefits of MLRsearch vs. binary search include:
+
+- In general MLRsearch is likely to execute more search trials overall, but
+ less trials at a set final duration.
+- In well behaving cases it greatly reduces (>50%) the overall duration
+ compared to a single PDR (or NDR) binary search duration,
+ while finding multiple drop rates.
+- In all cases MLRsearch yields the same or similar results to binary search.
+- Note: both binary search and MLRsearch are susceptible to reporting
+ non-repeatable results across multiple runs for very bad behaving
+ cases.
+
+Caveats:
+
+- Worst case MLRsearch can take longer than a binary search e.g. in case of
+ drastic changes in behaviour for trials at varying durations.
+
+Search Implementation
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-MRR tests measure the packet forwarding rate under the maximum
-load offered by traffic generator over a set trial duration,
+Following is a brief description of the current MLRsearch
+implementation in FD.io CSIT.
+
+Input Parameters
+````````````````
+
+#. *maximum_transmit_rate* - maximum packet transmit rate to be used by
+ external traffic generator, limited by either the actual Ethernet
+ link rate or traffic generator NIC model capabilities. Sample
+ defaults: 2 * 14.88 Mpps for 64B 10GE link rate,
+ 2 * 18.75 Mpps for 64B 40GE NIC maximum rate.
+#. *minimum_transmit_rate* - minimum packet transmit rate to be used for
+ measurements. MLRsearch fails if lower transmit rate needs to be
+ used to meet search criteria. Default: 2 * 10 kpps (could be higher).
+#. *final_trial_duration* - required trial duration for final rate
+ measurements. Default: 30 sec.
+#. *initial_trial_duration* - trial duration for initial MLRsearch phase.
+ Default: 1 sec.
+#. *final_relative_width* - required measurement resolution expressed as
+ (lower_bound, upper_bound) interval width relative to upper_bound.
+ Default: 0.5%.
+#. *packet_loss_ratio* - maximum acceptable PLR search criteria for
+ PDR measurements. Default: 0.5%.
+#. *number_of_intermediate_phases* - number of phases between the initial
+ phase and the final phase. Impacts the overall MLRsearch duration.
+ Less phases are required for well behaving cases, more phases
+ may be needed to reduce the overall search duration for worse behaving cases.
+ Default (2). (Value chosen based on limited experimentation to date.
+ More experimentation needed to arrive to clearer guidelines.)
+
+Initial Phase
+`````````````
+
+1. First trial measures at maximum rate and discovers MRR.
+
+ a. *in*: trial_duration = initial_trial_duration.
+ b. *in*: offered_transmit_rate = maximum_transmit_rate.
+ c. *do*: single trial.
+ d. *out*: measured loss ratio.
+ e. *out*: mrr = measured receive rate.
+
+2. Second trial measures at MRR and discovers MRR2.
+
+ a. *in*: trial_duration = initial_trial_duration.
+ b. *in*: offered_transmit_rate = MRR.
+ c. *do*: single trial.
+ d. *out*: measured loss ratio.
+ e. *out*: mrr2 = measured receive rate.
+
+3. Third trial measures at MRR2.
+
+ a. *in*: trial_duration = initial_trial_duration.
+ b. *in*: offered_transmit_rate = MRR2.
+ c. *do*: single trial.
+ d. *out*: measured loss ratio.
+
+Non-initial Phases
+``````````````````
+
+1. Main loop:
+
+ a. *in*: trial_duration for the current phase.
+ Set to initial_trial_duration for the first intermediate phase;
+ to final_trial_duration for the final phase;
+ or to the element of interpolating geometric sequence
+ for other intermediate phases.
+ For example with two intermediate phases, trial_duration
+ of the second intermediate phase is the geometric average
+ of initial_strial_duration and final_trial_duration.
+ b. *in*: relative_width_goal for the current phase.
+ Set to final_relative_width for the final phase;
+ doubled for each preceding phase.
+ For example with two intermediate phases,
+ the first intermediate phase uses quadruple of final_relative_width
+ and the second intermediate phase uses double of final_relative_width.
+ c. *in*: ndr_interval, pdr_interval from the previous main loop iteration
+ or the previous phase.
+ If the previous phase is the initial phase, both intervals have
+ lower_bound = MRR2, uper_bound = MRR.
+ Note that the initial phase is likely to create intervals with invalid bounds.
+ d. *do*: According to the procedure described in point 2,
+ either exit the phase (by jumping to 1.g.),
+ or prepare new transmit rate to measure with.
+ e. *do*: Perform the trial measurement at the new transmit rate
+ and trial_duration, compute its loss ratio.
+ f. *do*: Update the bounds of both intervals, based on the new measurement.
+ The actual update rules are numerous, as NDR external search
+ can affect PDR interval and vice versa, but the result
+ agrees with rules of both internal and external search.
+ For example, any new measurement below an invalid lower_bound
+ becomes the new lower_bound, while the old measurement
+ (previously acting as the invalid lower_bound)
+ becomes a new and valid upper_bound.
+ Go to next iteration (1.c.), taking the updated intervals as new input.
+ g. *out*: current ndr_interval and pdr_interval.
+ In the final phase this is also considered
+ to be the result of the whole search.
+ For other phases, the next phase loop is started
+ with the current results as an input.
+
+2. New transmit rate (or exit) calculation (for 1.d.):
+
+ - If there is an invalid bound then prepare for external search:
+
+ - *If* the most recent measurement at NDR lower_bound transmit rate
+ had the loss higher than zero, then
+ the new transmit rate is NDR lower_bound
+ decreased by two NDR interval widths.
+ - Else, *if* the most recent measurement at PDR lower_bound
+ transmit rate had the loss higher than PLR, then
+ the new transmit rate is PDR lower_bound
+ decreased by two PDR interval widths.
+ - Else, *if* the most recent measurement at NDR upper_bound
+ transmit rate had no loss, then
+ the new transmit rate is NDR upper_bound
+ increased by two NDR interval widths.
+ - Else, *if* the most recent measurement at PDR upper_bound
+ transmit rate had the loss lower or equal to PLR, then
+ the new transmit rate is PDR upper_bound
+ increased by two PDR interval widths.
+ - If interval width is higher than the current phase goal:
+
+ - Else, *if* NDR interval does not meet the current phase width goal,
+ prepare for internal search. The new transmit rate is
+ (NDR lower bound + NDR upper bound) / 2.
+ - Else, *if* PDR interval does not meet the current phase width goal,
+ prepare for internal search. The new transmit rate is
+ (PDR lower bound + PDR upper bound) / 2.
+ - Else, *if* some bound has still only been measured at a lower duration,
+ prepare to re-measure at the current duration (and the same transmit rate).
+ The order of priorities is:
+
+ - NDR lower_bound,
+ - PDR lower_bound,
+ - NDR upper_bound,
+ - PDR upper_bound.
+ - *Else*, do not prepare any new rate, to exit the phase.
+ This ensures that at the end of each non-initial phase
+ all intervals are valid, narrow enough, and measured
+ at current phase trial duration.
+
+Implementation Deviations
+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
+
+This document so far has been describing a simplified version of MLRsearch algorithm.
+The full algorithm as implemented contains additional logic,
+which makes some of the details (but not general ideas) above incorrect.
+Here is a short description of the additional logic as a list of principles,
+explaining their main differences from (or additions to) the simplified description,
+but without detailing their mutual interaction.
+
+1. *Logarithmic transmit rate.*
+ In order to better fit the relative width goal,
+ the interval doubling and halving is done differently.
+ For example, the middle of 2 and 8 is 4, not 5.
+2. *Optimistic maximum rate.*
+ The increased rate is never higher than the maximum rate.
+ Upper bound at that rate is always considered valid.
+3. *Pessimistic minimum rate.*
+ The decreased rate is never lower than the minimum rate.
+ If a lower bound at that rate is invalid,
+ a phase stops refining the interval further (until it gets re-measured).
+4. *Conservative interval updates.*
+ Measurements above current upper bound never update a valid upper bound,
+ even if drop ratio is low.
+ Measurements below current lower bound always update any lower bound
+ if drop ratio is high.
+5. *Ensure sufficient interval width.*
+ Narrow intervals make external search take more time to find a valid bound.
+ If the new transmit increased or decreased rate would result in width
+ less than the current goal, increase/decrease more.
+ This can happen if the measurement for the other interval
+ makes the current interval too narrow.
+ Similarly, take care the measurements in the initial phase
+ create wide enough interval.
+6. *Timeout for bad cases.*
+ The worst case for MLRsearch is when each phase converges to intervals
+ way different than the results of the previous phase.
+ Rather than suffer total search time several times larger
+ than pure binary search, the implemented tests fail themselves
+ when the search takes too long (given by argument *timeout*).
+
+(B)MRR Throughput
+-----------------
+
+Maximum Receive Rate (MRR) tests are complementary to MLRsearch tests,
+as they provide a maximum "raw" throughput benchmark for development and
+testing community. MRR tests measure the packet forwarding rate under
+the maximum load offered by traffic generator over a set trial duration,
regardless of packet loss. Maximum load for specified Ethernet frame
size is set to the bi-directional link rate.
-Current parameters for MRR tests:
+In |csit-release| MRR test code has been updated with a configurable
+burst MRR parameters: trial duration and number of trials in a single
+burst. This enabled a new Burst MRR (BMRR) methodology for more precise
+performance trending.
+
+Current parameters for BMRR tests:
- Ethernet frame sizes: 64B (78B for IPv6), IMIX, 1518B, 9000B; all
quoted sizes include frame CRC, but exclude per frame transmission
XL710. Packet rate for other tested frame sizes is limited by PCIe
Gen3 x8 bandwidth limitation of ~50Gbps.
-- Trial duration: 10sec.
+- Trial duration: 1 sec.
+
+- Number of trials per burst: 10.
Similarly to NDR/PDR throughput tests, MRR test should be reporting bi-
directional link rate (or NIC rate, if lower) if tested VPP
configuration can handle the packet rate higher than bi-directional link
rate, e.g. large packet tests and/or multi-core tests.
-MRR tests are used for continuous performance trending and for
-comparison between releases. Daily trending job tests subset of frame
-sizes, focusing on 64B (78B for IPv6) for all tests and IMIX for
-selected tests (vhost, memif).
+MRR tests are currently used for FD.io CSIT continuous performance
+trending and for comparison between releases. Daily trending job tests
+subset of frame sizes, focusing on 64B (78B for IPv6) for all tests and
+IMIX for selected tests (vhost, memif).
+
+MRR-like measurements are being used to establish starting conditions
+for experimental Probabilistic Loss Ratio Search (PLRsearch) used for
+soak testing, aimed at verifying continuous system performance over an
+extended period of time, hours, days, weeks, months. PLRsearch code is
+currently in experimental phase in FD.io CSIT project.
Packet Latency
--------------
Typically needed for use faster vector PMDs (together with
no-multi-seg).
#. socket-mem <value>,<value> - memory per numa. (Not required anymore
- due to VPP code changes, should be removed in CSIT rls1810.)
+ due to VPP code changes, should be removed in CSIT-18.10.)
Per Test Settings
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
[cfs,cfsrr1] settings.
- Adjusted Linux kernel :abbr:`CFS (Completely Fair Scheduler)`
scheduler policy for data plane threads used in CSIT is documented in
- `CSIT Performance Environment Tuning wiki <https://wiki.fd.io/view/CSIT/csit-perf-env-tuning-ubuntu1604>`_.
+ `CSIT Performance Environment Tuning wiki
+ <https://wiki.fd.io/view/CSIT/csit-perf-env-tuning-ubuntu1604>`_.
- The purpose is to verify performance impact (MRR and NDR/PDR
throughput) and same test measurements repeatability, by making VPP
and VM data plane threads less susceptible to other Linux OS system
Further documentation is available in
:ref:`container_orchestration_in_csit`.
+VPP_Device Functional
+---------------------
+
+|csit-release| added new VPP_Device test environment for functional VPP
+device tests integrated into LFN CI/CD infrastructure. VPP_Device tests
+run on 1-Node testbeds (1n-skx, 1n-arm) and rely on Linux SRIOV Virtual
+Function (VF), dot1q VLAN tagging and external loopback cables to
+facilitate packet passing over exernal physical links. Initial focus is
+on few baseline tests. Existing CSIT VIRL tests can be moved to
+VPP_Device framework by changing L1 and L2 KW(s). RF test definition
+code stays unchanged with the exception of requiring adjustments from
+3-Node to 2-Node logical topologies. CSIT VIRL to VPP_Device migration
+is expected in the next CSIT release.
+
IPSec on Intel QAT
------------------
STLFlowLatencyStats. In that case, returned statistics will also include
min/avg/max latency values.
-HTTP/TCP with WRK tool
+HTTP/TCP with WRK Tool
----------------------
`WRK HTTP benchmarking tool <https://github.com/wg/wrk>`_ is used for
- Connection close after set test duration time.
- Resulting flow sequence: >Syn, <Syn-Ack, >Ack, >Req[1], <Rep[1],
.., >Req[n], <Rep[n], >Fin, <Fin, >Ack.
+
+.. _binary search: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binary_search
+.. _exponential search: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exponential_search
+.. _estimation of standard deviation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unbiased_estimation_of_standard_deviation
+.. _simplified error propagation formula: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propagation_of_uncertainty#Simplification
Code Review / csit.git / blobdiff