From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
To: Vitaly Mayatskikh <v.mayatskih@gmail.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: speed regression in udp_lib_lport_inuse()
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 01:14:58 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49790C02.90800@cosmosbay.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <m3iqo7dkw4.wl%vmayatsk@redhat.com>
Vitaly Mayatskikh a écrit :
> At Thu, 22 Jan 2009 23:06:59 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
>>> err = bind(s, (const struct sockaddr*)&sa, sizeof(sa));
>> Bug here, if bind() returns -1 (all ports are in use)
>
> Yeah, there was assert(), but the program drops to problems very soon,
> I was lazy to handle this situation correctly and just removed it ;)
>
>>> Thanks!
>> Hello Vitaly, thanks for this excellent report.
>>
>> Yes, current code is really not good when all ports are in use :
>>
>> We now have to scan 28232 [1] times long chains of 220 sockets.
>> Thats very long (but at least thread is preemptable)
>>
>> In the past (before patches), only one thread was allowed to run in kernel while scanning
>> udp port table (we had only one global lock udp_hash_lock protecting the whole udp table).
>
> Very true, my (older) kernel with udp_hash_lock just become totally
> unresponsive after running this test. .29-rc2 become jerky only, but
> still works.
>
>> This thread was faster because it was not slowed down by other threads.
>> (But the rwlock we used was responsible for starvations of writers if many UDP frames
>> were received)
>>
>>
>>
>> One way to solve the problem could be to use following :
>>
>> 1) Raising UDP_HTABLE_SIZE from 128 to 1024 to reduce average chain lengths.
>>
>> 2) In bind(0) algo, use rcu locking to find a possible usable port. All cpus can run in //, without
>> dirtying locks. Then lock the found chain and recheck port is available before using it.
>
> I think 2 is definitely better than 1, because 1 is not actually
> fixing anything, but postpones the problem slightly.
>
>> [1] replace 28232 by your actual /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_local_port_range values
>> 61000 - 32768 = 28232
>>
>> I will try to code a patch before this week end.
>
> Cool!
>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Note : I tried to use a mutex to force only one thread in bind(0) code but got no real speedup.
>> But it should help if you have a SMP machine, since only one cpu will be busy in bind(0)
>>
>
> You saved my time, I was thinking about trying mutexes also. Thanks :)
>
Could you try following patch ?
Thank you
[PATCH] udp: optimize bind(0) if many ports are in use
commit 9088c5609584684149f3fb5b065aa7f18dcb03ff
(udp: Improve port randomization) introduced a regression for UDP bind() syscall
to null port (getting a random port) in case lot of ports are already in use.
This is because we do about 28000 scans of very long chains (220 sockets per chain),
with many spin_lock_bh()/spin_unlock_bh() calls.
Fix this using a bitmap (64 bytes for current value of UDP_HTABLE_SIZE)
so that we scan chains at most once.
Instead of 250 ms per bind() call, we get after patch a time of 2.9 ms
Based on a report from Vitaly Mayatskikh
Reported-by: Vitaly Mayatskikh <v.mayatskih@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
---
diff --git a/net/ipv4/udp.c b/net/ipv4/udp.c
index cf5ab05..adbdbd8 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/udp.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/udp.c
@@ -120,8 +120,11 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(sysctl_udp_wmem_min);
atomic_t udp_memory_allocated;
EXPORT_SYMBOL(udp_memory_allocated);
+#define PORTS_PER_CHAIN (65536 / UDP_HTABLE_SIZE)
+
static int udp_lib_lport_inuse(struct net *net, __u16 num,
const struct udp_hslot *hslot,
+ unsigned long *bitmap,
struct sock *sk,
int (*saddr_comp)(const struct sock *sk1,
const struct sock *sk2))
@@ -132,12 +135,16 @@ static int udp_lib_lport_inuse(struct net *net, __u16 num,
sk_nulls_for_each(sk2, node, &hslot->head)
if (net_eq(sock_net(sk2), net) &&
sk2 != sk &&
- sk2->sk_hash == num &&
+ (bitmap || sk2->sk_hash == num) &&
(!sk2->sk_reuse || !sk->sk_reuse) &&
(!sk2->sk_bound_dev_if || !sk->sk_bound_dev_if
|| sk2->sk_bound_dev_if == sk->sk_bound_dev_if) &&
- (*saddr_comp)(sk, sk2))
- return 1;
+ (*saddr_comp)(sk, sk2)) {
+ if (bitmap)
+ __set_bit(sk2->sk_hash / UDP_HTABLE_SIZE, bitmap);
+ else
+ return 1;
+ }
return 0;
}
@@ -158,34 +165,44 @@ int udp_lib_get_port(struct sock *sk, unsigned short snum,
struct net *net = sock_net(sk);
if (!snum) {
- int low, high, remaining;
- unsigned rand;
+ int low, high;
+ unsigned rand, slotn, bias;
unsigned short first;
+ DECLARE_BITMAP(bitmap, PORTS_PER_CHAIN);
inet_get_local_port_range(&low, &high);
- remaining = (high - low) + 1;
rand = net_random();
- snum = first = rand % remaining + low;
- rand |= 1;
- for (;;) {
- hslot = &udptable->hash[udp_hashfn(net, snum)];
+ bias = rand;
+ rand = ((rand >> 16) | 1) * UDP_HTABLE_SIZE;
+ for (slotn = 0; slotn < UDP_HTABLE_SIZE; slotn++) {
+ first = slotn + bias;
+ hslot = &udptable->hash[udp_hashfn(net, first)];
+ bitmap_zero(bitmap, PORTS_PER_CHAIN);
spin_lock_bh(&hslot->lock);
- if (!udp_lib_lport_inuse(net, snum, hslot, sk, saddr_comp))
- break;
- spin_unlock_bh(&hslot->lock);
+ udp_lib_lport_inuse(net, snum, hslot, bitmap, sk, saddr_comp);
+
+ snum = first;
+ /*
+ * PORTS_PER_CHAIN loops, because snum is unsigned short
+ * and we add an odd multiple of UDP_HTABLE_SIZE
+ */
do {
- snum = snum + rand;
- } while (snum < low || snum > high);
- if (snum == first)
- goto fail;
+ if (low <= snum && snum <= high &&
+ !test_bit(snum / UDP_HTABLE_SIZE, bitmap))
+ goto found;
+ snum += rand;
+ } while (snum != first);
+ spin_unlock_bh(&hslot->lock);
}
+ goto fail;
} else {
hslot = &udptable->hash[udp_hashfn(net, snum)];
spin_lock_bh(&hslot->lock);
- if (udp_lib_lport_inuse(net, snum, hslot, sk, saddr_comp))
+ if (udp_lib_lport_inuse(net, snum, hslot, NULL, sk, saddr_comp))
goto fail_unlock;
}
+found:
inet_sk(sk)->num = snum;
sk->sk_hash = snum;
if (sk_unhashed(sk)) {
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-23 0:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-22 18:49 speed regression in udp_lib_lport_inuse() Vitaly Mayatskikh
2009-01-22 22:06 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-22 22:14 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-01-23 0:20 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-22 22:40 ` Vitaly Mayatskikh
2009-01-23 0:14 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2009-01-23 9:42 ` Vitaly Mayatskikh
2009-01-23 11:45 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-23 13:44 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-23 14:56 ` Vitaly Mayatskikh
2009-01-23 16:05 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-01-23 16:14 ` Vitaly Mayatskikh
2009-01-26 8:20 ` [PATCH] udp: optimize bind(0) if many ports are in use Eric Dumazet
2009-01-27 5:35 ` David Miller
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=49790C02.90800@cosmosbay.com \
--to=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=v.mayatskih@gmail.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.