Re: [Gems-users] question about link utilization


Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 23:51:11 -0500
From: Niket Agarwal <niketa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Gems-users] question about link utilization
If you have a look at printStats in Switch.C, the utilization percentages are for the throttles which are essentially outlinks.

Zhang Yu wrote:
Then for the stats below:

switch_16_inlinks: 16
switch_16_outlinks: 16
links_utilized_percent_switch_16: 8.8189e-07
links_utilized_percent_switch_16_link_0: 7.39941e-06 bw: 1215752192 base_latency: 1 links_utilized_percent_switch_16_link_1: 2.43733e-07 bw: 1410065408 base_latency: 6 links_utilized_percent_switch_16_link_2: 1.6149e-06 bw: 1410065408 base_latency: 6 links_utilized_percent_switch_16_link_3: 2.37152e-07 bw: 1410065408 base_latency: 6 links_utilized_percent_switch_16_link_4: 2.67335e-07 bw: 1410065408 base_latency: 6 links_utilized_percent_switch_16_link_5: 3.68777e-07 bw: 1410065408 base_latency: 6 links_utilized_percent_switch_16_link_6: 2.3806e-07 bw: 1410065408 base_latency: 6 links_utilized_percent_switch_16_link_7: 5.06984e-07 bw: 1410065408 base_latency: 6 links_utilized_percent_switch_16_link_8: 2.603e-07 bw: 1410065408 base_latency: 6 links_utilized_percent_switch_16_link_9: 2.30344e-07 bw: 1410065408 base_latency: 6 links_utilized_percent_switch_16_link_10: 6.80366e-07 bw: 1410065408 base_latency: 6 links_utilized_percent_switch_16_link_11: 2.35791e-07 bw: 1410065408 base_latency: 6 links_utilized_percent_switch_16_link_12: 1.04529e-06 bw: 1410065408 base_latency: 6 links_utilized_percent_switch_16_link_13: 2.49407e-07 bw: 1410065408 base_latency: 6 links_utilized_percent_switch_16_link_14: 2.34429e-07 bw: 1410065408 base_latency: 6 links_utilized_percent_switch_16_link_15: 2.97972e-07 bw: 1410065408 base_latency: 6

switch16 has 16 outlinks and 16 inlinks, so that's 32 links in total, while the network stats only provide the utilization of 16 links of this switch. In this case, what should these 16 links be, outgoing links?

Thanks,
Yu

On Jan 31, 2008 10:20 PM, Greg Byrd <gbyrd@xxxxxxxx <mailto:gbyrd@xxxxxxxx>> wrote:

    They're not really bidirectional links.  There are two physical
    links, one in each direction.  The utilization for one direction
    is completely independent of the utilization in the other direction.

    ...Greg


    Zhang Yu wrote:
    Thanks for the reply. I don't understand the meaning of the link
    utilization in the stats. Should it be the average utilization of
    both incoming link and outgoing link? For example, if
    switch0_link7 is connected to switch2_link 4, and both of the
    links are bidirectional(which means switch0_link7(or
    switch2_link4) is composed of 2 links, one is incoming and the
    other is outgoing). If this is the case, then the two links of
    the two switches should have the same utilization.

    Thanks,
    Yu

    On Jan 31, 2008 10:01 PM, Niket Agarwal <niketa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
    <mailto:niketa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> wrote:

        Two switches connected to each other will have two different
        "physical"
        links in opposite directions.

        But why should the link utilizations be the same ? The
        traffic that is
        going in either direction has to be exactly the same for this.

         - Niket

        Zhang Yu wrote:
        > Hi,
        >
        > I'm wondering how the intra-chip switches connect to each
        other. As I
        > understand that, when the 2 intra-chip switches are
        connect, they
        > share wo links (different direction). In this case, the certain
        > connected links for these two switches should have the same
        link
        > utilization. However, when I check with the statistics, I
        could not
        > find different links with same utilization. Do I
        misunderstand the
        > connection between the switches? Can somebody explain this?
        >
        > Thanks,
        > Yu
        >
        ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        >
        > _______________________________________________
        > Gems-users mailing list
        > Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>
        > https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gems-users
        > Use Google to search the GEMS Users mailing list by adding
        "site:https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/archive/gems-users/"; to your
        search.
        >
        >

        _______________________________________________
        Gems-users mailing list
        Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>
        https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gems-users
        Use Google to search the GEMS Users mailing list by adding
        "site:https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/archive/gems-users/"; to your
        search.


    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    _______________________________________________ Gems-users
    mailing list Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
    <mailto:Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>
    https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gems-users Use Google
    to search the GEMS Users mailing list by adding
    "site:https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/archive/gems-users/"; to your search.


    _______________________________________________
    Gems-users mailing list
    Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx>
    https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gems-users
    Use Google to search the GEMS Users mailing list by adding
    "site:https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/archive/gems-users/"; to your search.



------------------------------------------------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Gems-users mailing list
Gems-users@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/gems-users
Use Google to search the GEMS Users mailing list by adding "site:https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/archive/gems-users/"; to your search.


[← Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread→]