From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
To: Vernon Mauery <vernux@us.ibm.com>
Cc: netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
rt-users <linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 20:07:19 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <49C14667.2040806@cosmosbay.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <49C12E64.1000301@us.ibm.com>
Vernon Mauery a écrit :
> I have been beating on network throughput in the -rt kernel for some time
> now. After digging down through the send path of UDP packets, I found
> that the sk_buff_head.lock is under some very high contention. This lock
> is acquired each time a packet is enqueued on a qdisc and then acquired
> again to dequeue the packet. Under high networking loads, the enqueueing
> processes are not only contending among each other for the lock, but also
> with the net-tx soft irq. This makes for some very high contention on this
> one lock. My testcase is running varying numbers of concurrent netperf
> instances pushing UDP traffic to another machine. As the count goes from
> 1 to 2, the network performance increases. But from 2 to 4 and from 4
> to 8,
> we see a big decline, with 8 instances pushing about half of what a single
> thread can do.
>
> Running 2.6.29-rc6-rt3 on an 8-way machine with a 10GbE card (I have tried
> both NetXen and Broadcom, with very similar results), I can only push about
> 1200 Mb/s. Whereas with the mainline 2.6.29-rc8 kernel, I can push nearly
> 6000 Mb/s. But still not as much as I think is possible. I was curious and
> decided to see if the mainline kernel was hitting the same lock, and using
> /proc/lock_stat, it is hitting the sk_buff_head.lock as well (it was the
> number one contended lock).
>
> So while this issue really hits -rt kernels hard, it has a real effect on
> mainline kernels as well. The contention of the spinlocks is amplified
> when they get turned into rt-mutexes, which causes a double context switch.
>
> Below is the top of the lock_stat for 2.6.29-rc8. This was captured from
> a 1 minute network stress test. The next high contender had 2 orders of
> magnitude fewer contentions. Think of the throughput increase if we could
> ease this contention a bit. We might even be able to saturate a 10GbE
> link.
>
> lock_stat version 0.3
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> class name con-bounces contentions waittime-min
> waittime-max waittime-total acq-bounces acquisitions
> holdtime-min holdtime-max holdtime-total
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> &list->lock#3: 24517307 24643791 0.71
> 1286.62 56516392.42 34834296 44904018
> 0.60 164.79 31314786.02
> -------------
> &list->lock#3 15596927 [<ffffffff812474da>]
> dev_queue_xmit+0x2ea/0x468
> &list->lock#3 9046864 [<ffffffff812546e9>]
> __qdisc_run+0x11b/0x1ef
> -------------
> &list->lock#3 6525300 [<ffffffff812546e9>]
> __qdisc_run+0x11b/0x1ef
> &list->lock#3 18118491 [<ffffffff812474da>]
> dev_queue_xmit+0x2ea/0x468
>
>
> The story is the same for -rt kernels, only the waittime and holdtime
> are both
> orders of magnitude greater.
>
> I am not exactly clear on the solution, but if I understand correctly,
> in the
> past there has been some discussion of batched enqueueing and
> dequeueing. Is
> anyone else working on this problem right now who has just not yet posted
> anything for review? Questions, comments, flames?
>
Yes we have a known contention point here, but before adding more complex code,
could you try following patch please ?
[PATCH] net: Reorder fields of struct Qdisc
dev_queue_xmit() needs to dirty fields "state" and "q"
On x86_64 arch, they currently span two cache lines, involving more
cache line ping pongs than necessary.
Before patch :
offsetof(struct Qdisc, state)=0x38
offsetof(struct Qdisc, q)=0x48
offsetof(struct Qdisc, dev_queue)=0x60
After patch :
offsetof(struct Qdisc, dev_queue)=0x38
offsetof(struct Qdisc, state)=0x48
offsetof(struct Qdisc, q)=0x50
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
diff --git a/include/net/sch_generic.h b/include/net/sch_generic.h
index f8c4742..e24feeb 100644
--- a/include/net/sch_generic.h
+++ b/include/net/sch_generic.h
@@ -51,10 +51,11 @@ struct Qdisc
u32 handle;
u32 parent;
atomic_t refcnt;
- unsigned long state;
+ struct netdev_queue *dev_queue;
+
struct sk_buff *gso_skb;
+ unsigned long state;
struct sk_buff_head q;
- struct netdev_queue *dev_queue;
struct Qdisc *next_sched;
struct list_head list;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-03-18 19:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-03-18 17:24 High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock Vernon Mauery
2009-03-18 19:07 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2009-03-18 20:17 ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-20 23:29 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-03-23 8:32 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-23 8:32 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-23 8:37 ` David Miller
2009-03-23 8:50 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-04-02 14:13 ` Herbert Xu
2009-04-02 14:15 ` Herbert Xu
2009-03-18 20:54 ` Andi Kleen
2009-03-18 21:03 ` David Miller
2009-03-18 21:10 ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-18 21:38 ` David Miller
2009-03-18 21:49 ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-19 1:02 ` David Miller
2009-03-18 21:54 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-03-19 1:03 ` David Miller
2009-03-19 1:13 ` Sven-Thorsten Dietrich
2009-03-19 1:17 ` David Miller
2009-03-19 1:43 ` Sven-Thorsten Dietrich
2009-03-19 1:54 ` David Miller
2009-03-19 5:49 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-19 5:49 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-19 5:58 ` David Miller
2009-03-19 14:04 ` [PATCH] net: reorder struct Qdisc for better SMP performance Eric Dumazet
2009-03-19 14:04 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-03-20 8:33 ` David Miller
2009-03-19 13:45 ` High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock Andi Kleen
2009-03-19 3:48 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-03-19 5:38 ` David Miller
2009-03-19 12:42 ` Gregory Haskins
2009-03-19 20:52 ` David Miller
2009-03-19 12:50 ` Peter W. Morreale
2009-03-19 7:15 ` Evgeniy Polyakov
2009-03-18 21:07 ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-18 21:45 ` Eilon Greenstein
2009-03-18 21:51 ` Vernon Mauery
2009-03-18 21:59 ` Andi Kleen
2009-03-18 22:19 ` Rick Jones
2009-03-19 12:59 ` Peter W. Morreale
2009-03-19 13:36 ` Peter W. Morreale
2009-03-19 13:46 ` Andi Kleen
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=49C14667.2040806@cosmosbay.com \
--to=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=vernux@us.ibm.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.