Third party x86 hw ROS support

[NathanA]

I tested about five different boxes at the time, and so I can’t honestly remember which ports worked and which didn’t, but suffice it to say, all six did not show up on that box

Wait…ALL six did not show up? That doesn’t make much sense. Now I’m not so sure about this particular anecdote accurately reflecting i226 support in ROS…

I thought we were only talking about the last 4. The first 2 that are 8086:10fb are absolutely fully supported, and have been for years. Not sure what might have prevented ROS from seeing them on that particular box, but it’s not from lack of drivers.

(Obviously I renamed them to the “sfp-sfpplusX” scheme; they show up by default as etherX just like any other third-party expansion Ethernet interface does.)

[sch]

Please send supout.rif file from your system, and we will look at what we can do.

[sirbryan]

I tested about five different boxes at the time, and so I can’t honestly remember which ports worked and which didn’t, but suffice it to say, all six did not show up on that box

Wait…ALL six did not show up?

Perhaps I worded that poorly. Some of them showed up, but not all six of them. Likely the SFP+ ports and not the 2.5G ports.

I’ll see if I can lab it up again.

[NathanA]

Perhaps I worded that poorly. Some of them showed up, but not all six of them. Likely the SFP+ ports and not the 2.5G ports.

Ahhh. “all six did not” (what was written), vs. “not all six of them did” (what was intended)

[hapoo]

TCP-Download: 66.4Gbps local-cpu-load:96%
TCP-Upload: 68.4Gbps local-cpu-load:96% remote-cpu-load:96%
UDP-Download: 72.0Gbps local-cpu-load:11% remote-cpu-load:11%
UDP-Upload: 72.7Gbps local-cpu-load:11% remote-cpu-load:11%

Your CHR running under Proxmox should get about the same speed to itself.
Note - when running through a network interface - you will not get these 60+ Gig speeds. This is a decent test to see how fast internally your CHR ROS device can process packets internally - not counting physical/virtual interfaces packets to through.

Note - be sure to set your Proxmox server to be tuned for throughput verses response.

Thanks for the test results. I obviously have a problem.
I ran a loopback test on my setup and I’m getting 8-9gbps up and down.
According to proxmox my cpu usage is around 5% so there’s definitely a bottleneck somewhere, but I don’t know where.
My CHR also has two virtio nics, one for the proxmox wan bridge and one for the lan bridge.
How did you go about tuning it for throughput rather than response? multiqueue?



Edit: I just realized my chr is only licensed to 10gbps. That’s probably why I’m not seeing more.

[TomjNorthIdaho]

Re: Edit: I just realized my chr is only licensed to 10gbps. That’s probably why I’m not seeing more.

What you could do is spin up a new 2’nd CHR , upgrade to the P-Unlimited license ( trial ). Then run a speedtest to 127.0.0.1
That should give you an indicator how well your Proxmox server runs a CHR.

[hapoo]

Re: Edit: I just realized my chr is only licensed to 10gbps. That’s probably why I’m not seeing more.

What you could do is spin up a new 2’nd CHR , upgrade to the P-Unlimited license ( trial ). Then run a speedtest to 127.0.0.1
That should give you an indicator how well your Proxmox server runs a CHR.

My laziness and curiosity had a fight, and curiosity won.

Running in tcp mode with no firewall rules I get:
Receive: 235gbps 95% cpu load
Send: 235gbps 95% cpu load
Both: 17gbps / 15gbps 62% cpu load

[himurae]

8086:125c

Both awesome as well as interesting; thanks much.

The only thread I had been able to unearth so far with anybody at all talking about i226-V compatibility with ROS is this one from late 2023, which seems to imply that the interfaces do actually show up for them.

In light of your testimony, though, I’m wondering if they typo’d i225-V, which ROS added support for in late 2022.

ros x86 works 100% fine on Chinese mini PC with 2.5gbps ports just go for it man ,also you could use so many other router software like Vyos/opnsense/sophos/ipfire on them