From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>,
Sabrina Dubroca <sd@queasysnail.net>,
brouer@redhat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/5] net: add protocol level recvmmsg support
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2016 13:21:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161128132141.217aef39@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1480330358.6718.13.camel@redhat.com>
On Mon, 28 Nov 2016 11:52:38 +0100
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> wrote:
> Hi Jesper,
>
> On Fri, 2016-11-25 at 18:37 +0100, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> > > The measured performance delta is as follow:
> > >
> > > before after
> > > (Kpps) (Kpps)
> > >
> > > udp flood[1] 570 1800(+215%)
> > > max tput[2] 1850 3500(+89%)
> > > single queue[3] 1850 1630(-11%)
> > >
> > > [1] line rate flood using multiple 64 bytes packets and multiple flows
> >
> > Is [1] sending multiple flow in the a single UDP-sink?
>
> Yes, in the test scenario [1] there are multiple UDP flows using 16
> different rx queues on the receiver host, and a single user space
> reader.
>
> > > [2] like [1], but using the minimum number of flows to saturate the user space
> > > sink, that is 1 flow for the old kernel and 3 for the patched one.
> > > the tput increases since the contention on the rx lock is low.
> > > [3] like [1] but using a single flow with both old and new kernel. All the
> > > packets land on the same rx queue and there is a single ksoftirqd instance
> > > running
> >
> > It is important to know, if ksoftirqd and the UDP-sink runs on the same CPU?
>
> No pinning is enforced. The scheduler moves the user space process on a
> different cpu in respect to the ksoftriqd kernel thread.
This floating userspace process can cause a high variation between test
runs. On my system, the performance drops to approx 600Kpps when
ksoftirqd and udp_sink share the same CPU.
Quick run with your patches applied:
Sender: pktgen with big packets
./pktgen_sample03_burst_single_flow.sh -i mlx5p2 -d 198.18.50.1 \
-m 7c:fe:90:c7:b1:cf -t1 -b128 -s 1472
Forced CPU0 for both ksoftirq and udp_sink
# taskset -c 0 ./udp_sink --count $((10**7)) --port 9 --repeat 1
ns pps cycles
recvMmsg/32 run: 0 10000000 1667.93 599547.16 6685
recvmsg run: 0 10000000 1810.70 552273.39 7257
read run: 0 10000000 1634.72 611723.95 6552
recvfrom run: 0 10000000 1585.06 630891.39 6353
> > > The regression in the single queue scenario is actually due to the improved
> > > performance of the recvmmsg() syscall: the user space process is now
> > > significantly faster than the ksoftirqd process so that the latter needs often
> > > to wake up the user space process.
> >
> > When measuring these things, make sure that we/you measure both the packets
> > actually received in the userspace UDP-sink, and also measure packets
> > RX processed by ksoftirq (and I often also look at what HW got delivered).
> > Some times, when userspace is too slow, the kernel can/will drop packets.
> >
> > It is actually quite easily verified with cmdline:
> >
> > nstat > /dev/null && sleep 1 && nstat
> >
> > For HW measurements I use the tool ethtool_stats.pl:
> > https://github.com/netoptimizer/network-testing/blob/master/bin/ethtool_stats.pl
>
> We collected the UDP stats for all the three scenarios; we have lot of
> drop in test[1] and little, by design, in test[2]. In test [3], with the
> patched kernel, the drops are 0: ksoftirqd is way slower than the user
> space sink.
>
> > > Since ksoftirqd is the bottle-neck is such scenario, overall this causes a
> > > tput reduction. In a real use case, where the udp sink is performing some
> > > actual processing of the received data, such regression is unlikely to really
> > > have an effect.
> >
> > My experience is that the performance of RX UDP is affected by:
> > * if socket is connected or not (yes, RX side also)
> > * state of /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_early_demux
> >
> > You don't need to run with all the combinations, but it would be nice
> > if you specify what config your have based your measurements on (and
> > keep them stable in your runs).
> >
> > I've actually implemented the "--connect" option to my udp_sink
> > program[1] today, but I've not pushed it yet, if you are interested.
>
> The reported numbers are all gathered with unconnected sockets and early
> demux enabled.
>
> We also used connected socket for test[3], with relative little
> difference (the tput increased for both unpatched and patched kernel,
> and the difference was roughly the same).
When I use connected sockets (RX side) and ip_early_demux enabled, I do
see a performance boost for recvmmsg. With these patches applied,
forced ksoftirqd on CPU0 and udp_sink on CPU2, pktgen single flow
sending size 1472 bytes.
$ sysctl net/ipv4/ip_early_demux
net.ipv4.ip_early_demux = 1
$ grep -H . /proc/sys/net/core/{r,w}mem_max
/proc/sys/net/core/rmem_max:1048576
/proc/sys/net/core/wmem_max:1048576
# taskset -c 2 ./udp_sink --count $((10**7)) --port 9 --repeat 1
# ns pps cycles
recvMmsg/32 run: 0 10000000 462.51 2162095.23 1853
recvmsg run: 0 10000000 536.47 1864041.75 2150
read run: 0 10000000 492.01 2032460.71 1972
recvfrom run: 0 10000000 553.94 1805262.84 2220
# taskset -c 2 ./udp_sink --count $((10**7)) --port 9 --repeat 1 --connect
# ns pps cycles
recvMmsg/32 run: 0 10000000 405.15 2468225.03 1623
recvmsg run: 0 10000000 548.23 1824049.58 2197
read run: 0 10000000 489.76 2041825.27 1962
recvfrom run: 0 10000000 466.18 2145091.77 1868
My theory is that by enabling connect'ed RX socket, the ksoftirqd gets
faster (no fib_lookup) and is no-longer a bottleneck. This is
confirmed by the nstat output below.
Below: unconnected
$ nstat > /dev/null && sleep 1 && nstat
#kernel
IpInReceives 2143944 0.0
IpInDelivers 2143945 0.0
UdpInDatagrams 2143944 0.0
IpExtInOctets 3125889306 0.0
IpExtInNoECTPkts 2143956 0.0
Below: connected
$ nstat > /dev/null && sleep 1 && nstat
#kernel
IpInReceives 2925155 0.0
IpInDelivers 2925156 0.0
UdpInDatagrams 2440925 0.0
UdpInErrors 484230 0.0
UdpRcvbufErrors 484230 0.0
IpExtInOctets 4264896402 0.0
IpExtInNoECTPkts 2925170 0.0
This is a 50Gbit/s link, and IpInReceives correspondent to approx 35Gbit/s.
--
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:[~2016-11-28 12:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-25 15:39 [PATCH net-next 0/5] net: add protocol level recvmmsg support Paolo Abeni
2016-11-25 15:39 ` [PATCH net-next 1/5] net/socket: factor out msghdr manipulation helpers Paolo Abeni
2016-11-25 15:39 ` [PATCH net-next 2/5] net/socket: add per protocol mmesg support Paolo Abeni
2016-11-25 15:39 ` [PATCH net-next 3/5] net/udp: factor out main skb processing routine Paolo Abeni
2016-11-25 15:39 ` [PATCH net-next 4/5] net/socket: add helpers for recvmmsg Paolo Abeni
2016-11-25 20:52 ` kbuild test robot
2016-11-25 20:52 ` kbuild test robot
2016-11-25 22:30 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-11-27 16:21 ` Paolo Abeni
2016-11-25 15:39 ` [PATCH net-next 5/5] udp: add recvmmsg implementation Paolo Abeni
2016-11-25 17:09 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-11-28 12:32 ` David Laight
2016-11-30 0:22 ` David Miller
2016-11-30 3:47 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-11-25 17:37 ` [PATCH net-next 0/5] net: add protocol level recvmmsg support Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2016-11-28 10:52 ` Paolo Abeni
2016-11-28 12:21 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer [this message]
2016-11-28 13:52 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2016-11-25 21:16 ` 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=20161128132141.217aef39@redhat.com \
--to=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=hannes@stressinduktion.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=sd@queasysnail.net \
/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.