From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: brouer@redhat.com, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@lwn.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] softirq: let ksoftirqd do its job
Date: Thu, 1 Sep 2016 13:02:31 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160901130231.58355405@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160831235116.33b1946b@redhat.com>
On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 23:51:16 +0200
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <jbrouer@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Aug 2016 13:42:30 -0700
> Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 2016-08-31 at 21:40 +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> >
> > > I can confirm the improvement of approx 900Kpps (no wonder people have
> > > been complaining about DoS against UDP/DNS servers).
> > >
> > > BUT during my extensive testing, of this patch, I also think that we
> > > have not gotten to the bottom of this. I was expecting to see a higher
> > > (collective) PPS number as I add more UDP servers, but I don't.
> > >
> > > Running many UDP netperf's with command:
> > > super_netperf 4 -H 198.18.50.3 -l 120 -t UDP_STREAM -T 0,0 -- -m 1472 -n -N
> >
> > Are you sure sender can send fast enough ?
>
> Yes, as I can see drops (overrun UDP limit UdpRcvbufErrors). Switching
> to pktgen and udp_sink to be sure.
>
> > >
> > > With 'top' I can see ksoftirq are still getting a higher %CPU time:
> > >
> > > PID %CPU TIME+ COMMAND
> > > 3 36.5 2:28.98 ksoftirqd/0
> > > 10724 9.6 0:01.05 netserver
> > > 10722 9.3 0:01.05 netserver
> > > 10723 9.3 0:01.05 netserver
> > > 10725 9.3 0:01.05 netserver
> >
> > Looks much better on my machine, with "udprcv -n 4" (using 4 threads,
> > and 4 sockets using SO_REUSEPORT)
> >
> > 10755 root 20 0 34948 4 0 S 79.7 0.0 0:33.66 udprcv
> > 3 root 20 0 0 0 0 R 19.9 0.0 0:25.49 ksoftirqd/0
> >
> > Pressing 'H' in top gives :
> >
> > 3 root 20 0 0 0 0 R 19.9 0.0 0:47.84 ksoftirqd/0
> > 10756 root 20 0 34948 4 0 R 19.9 0.0 0:30.76 udprcv
> > 10757 root 20 0 34948 4 0 R 19.9 0.0 0:30.76 udprcv
> > 10758 root 20 0 34948 4 0 S 19.9 0.0 0:30.76 udprcv
> > 10759 root 20 0 34948 4 0 S 19.9 0.0 0:30.76 udprcv
>
> Yes, I'm seeing the same when unning 5 instances my own udp_sink[1]:
> sudo taskset -c 0 ./udp_sink --port 10003 --recvmsg --reuse-port --count $((10**10))
>
> PID S %CPU TIME+ COMMAND
> 3 R 21.6 2:21.33 ksoftirqd/0
> 3838 R 15.9 0:02.18 udp_sink
> 3856 R 15.6 0:02.16 udp_sink
> 3862 R 15.6 0:02.16 udp_sink
> 3844 R 15.3 0:02.15 udp_sink
> 3850 S 15.3 0:02.15 udp_sink
>
> This is the expected result, that adding more userspace receivers
> scales up. I needed 5 udp_sink's before I don't see any drops, either
> this says the job performed by ksoftirqd is 5 times faster or the
> collective queue size of the programs was fast enough to absorb the
> scheduling jitter.
I need some help from scheduler people explaining this!
In above run of udp_sink (which had expected behavior), I ran udp_sink
in 5 different xterm/shells. Below, I'm running all 5 udp_sink
programs from the same bash shell (just backgrounding them).
PID S %CPU TIME+ COMMAND
3 R 50.0 29:02.23 ksoftirqd/0
10881 R 10.7 1:01.61 udp_sink
10837 R 10.0 1:05.20 udp_sink
10852 S 10.0 1:01.78 udp_sink
10862 R 10.0 1:05.19 udp_sink
10844 S 9.7 1:01.91 udp_sink
This is strange, why is ksoftirqd/0 getting 50% of the CPU time???
And I'm no-longer getting the full tput delivered into userspace (as I
did before with 5 receivers).
$ nstat > /dev/null && sleep 1 && nstat
#kernel
IpInReceives 1234368 0.0
IpInDelivers 1234368 0.0
UdpInDatagrams 1133971 0.0
UdpInErrors 80332 0.0
UdpRcvbufErrors 80332 0.0
IpExtInOctets 56792704 0.0
IpExtInNoECTPkts 1234624 0.0
--
Best regards,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer
MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
Author of http://www.iptv-analyzer.org
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-01 11:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 31+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <4f1c4b38528762619fff1fa963de8971006c1234.1472460085.git.pabeni@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <20160831100854.23dad2d8@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <1472650472.14381.317.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
[not found] ` <1472650688.32433.115.camel@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <1472652643.14381.320.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
[not found] ` <20160831164216.2901190c@redhat.com>
[not found] ` <1472661956.14381.335.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
2016-08-31 17:42 ` [PATCH] softirq: let ksoftirqd do its job Eric Dumazet
2016-08-31 19:40 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2016-08-31 20:42 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-08-31 21:51 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2016-08-31 22:27 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-08-31 22:47 ` Rick Jones
2016-08-31 23:11 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-08-31 23:29 ` Rick Jones
2016-09-01 10:38 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2016-09-01 13:06 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-09-01 11:02 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer [this message]
2016-09-01 11:11 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-09-01 11:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-01 12:29 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2016-09-01 12:38 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2016-09-01 12:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-01 13:30 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2016-09-01 15:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-02 8:35 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2016-09-01 12:57 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-09-01 13:00 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-09-01 13:25 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-09-01 12:05 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-09-01 12:51 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-09-01 12:01 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-09-02 6:39 ` David Miller
2016-09-23 11:35 ` Daniel Borkmann
2016-09-23 11:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-23 16:51 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2016-09-23 21:16 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-30 11:55 ` [tip:irq/core] softirq: Let " tip-bot for Eric Dumazet
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160901130231.58355405@redhat.com \
--to=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=corbet@lwn.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=hannes@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=riel@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.