All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Changli Gao <xiaosuo@gmail.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Tom Herbert <therbert@google.com>,
	Linux Netdev List <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6] net: Xmit Packet Steering (XPS)
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 05:58:36 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B0621FC.6060004@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <412e6f7f0911191812uf0abc61w2f0d44f4d71bd55@mail.gmail.com>

Changli Gao a écrit :
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 7:46 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
>> index 9977288..9e134f6 100644
>> --- a/net/core/dev.c
>> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
>> @@ -2000,6 +2001,7 @@ gso:
>>         */
>>        rcu_read_lock_bh();
>>
>> +       skb->sending_cpu = cpu = smp_processor_id();
>>        txq = dev_pick_tx(dev, skb);
>>        q = rcu_dereference(txq->qdisc);
> 
> I think assigning cpu to skb->sending_cpu just before calling
> hard_start_xmit is better, because the CPU which dequeues the skb will
> be another one.

I want to record the application CPU, because I want the application CPU
to call sock_wfree(), not the CPU that happened to dequeue skb to transmit it
in case of txq contention.

> 
>> @@ -2024,8 +2026,6 @@ gso:
>>           Either shot noqueue qdisc, it is even simpler 8)
>>         */
>>        if (dev->flags & IFF_UP) {
>> -               int cpu = smp_processor_id(); /* ok because BHs are off */
>> -
>>                if (txq->xmit_lock_owner != cpu) {
>>
>>                        HARD_TX_LOCK(dev, txq, cpu);
>> @@ -2967,7 +2967,7 @@ static void net_rx_action(struct softirq_action *h)
>>        }
>>  out:
>>        local_irq_enable();
>> -
>> +       xps_flush();
> 
> If there isn't any new skbs, the memory will be hold forever. I know
> you want to eliminate unnecessary IPI, how about sending IPI only when
> the remote xps_pcpu_queues are changed from empty to nonempty?

I dont understand your remark, and dont see the problem, yet.

I send IPI only on cpus I know I have at least one skb queueud for them.
For each cpu taking TX completion interrupts I have :

One bitmask (xps_cpus) of cpus I will eventually send IPI at end of net_rx_action()

One array of skb lists per remote cpu, allocated on cpu node memory, thanks
to __alloc_percpu() at boot time.

I say _eventually_ because the algo is :

+		if (cpu_online(cpu)) {
+			spin_lock(&q->list.lock);
+			prevlen = skb_queue_len(&q->list);
+			skb_queue_splice_init(&head[cpu], &q->list);
+			spin_unlock(&q->list.lock);
+			/*
+			 * We hope remote cpu will be fast enough to transfert
+			 * this list to its completion queue before our
+			 * next xps_flush() call
+			 */
+			if (!prevlen)
+				__smp_call_function_single(cpu, &q->csd, 0);
+			continue;

So I send an IPI only if needed, once for the whole skb list.

With my pktgen (no skb cloning setup) tests, and

ethtool -C eth3 tx-usecs 1000 tx-frames 100

I really saw batches of 100 frames given from CPU X (NIC interrupts) to CPU Y (pktgen cpu)

What memory is hold forever ?

  reply	other threads:[~2009-11-20  4:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-11-19 23:46 [PATCH net-next-2.6] net: Xmit Packet Steering (XPS) Eric Dumazet
2009-11-20  2:12 ` Changli Gao
2009-11-20  4:58   ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2009-11-20  5:11     ` Changli Gao
2009-11-20  5:24       ` Eric Dumazet
2009-11-20  5:34         ` Changli Gao
2009-11-20  5:42           ` Eric Dumazet
2009-11-20  5:50             ` Changli Gao
     [not found] ` <65634d660911191641o4210a797mf1e8168dd8dd8b60@mail.gmail.com>
2009-11-20  5:08   ` Eric Dumazet
2009-11-20 13:32 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-11-20 14:45   ` Eric Dumazet
2009-11-20 20:04     ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-11-20 21:43       ` Eric Dumazet
2009-11-20 22:08         ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-11-20 22:21           ` Eric Dumazet
2009-11-20 20:51 ` Andi Kleen
2009-11-20 20:53   ` David Miller
2009-11-20 22:30   ` Eric Dumazet
2009-11-20 22:37     ` Andi Kleen
     [not found]       ` <65634d660911201642k3930dc78vd576e0e89dc0c794@mail.gmail.com>
2009-11-21  6:58         ` Eric Dumazet
2009-11-20 20:53 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-11-20 21:35   ` Eric Dumazet
2009-11-20 21:43     ` Joe Perches
2009-11-20 21:49       ` David Miller
2009-11-20 22:01       ` Eric Dumazet
2009-11-20 22:34     ` David Miller
2009-11-20 22:32 ` David Miller
2009-11-20 22:36   ` 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=4B0621FC.6060004@gmail.com \
    --to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=therbert@google.com \
    --cc=xiaosuo@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.