From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Felix Fietkau <nbd@openwrt.org>
Subject: Re: Optimizing instruction-cache, more packets at each stage
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2016 15:38:43 +0100
Message-ID: <56990473.9090300@openwrt.org>
References: <20160115142223.1e92be75@redhat.com>
 <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6D1CCC6613@AcuExch.aculab.com>
 <20160115150025.13a5db04@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
	Daniel Borkmann <borkmann@iogearbox.net>,
	Marek Majkowski <marek@cloudflare.com>,
	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>,
	Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
	John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@intel.com>
To: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>,
	David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from arrakis.dune.hu ([78.24.191.176]:33000 "EHLO arrakis.dune.hu"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751224AbcAOOiv (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 15 Jan 2016 09:38:51 -0500
In-Reply-To: <20160115150025.13a5db04@redhat.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On 2016-01-15 15:00, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 13:36:04 +0000
> David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM> wrote:
> 
>> From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer
>> > Sent: 15 January 2016 13:22
>> ...
>> > I want to do some instruction-cache level optimizations.
>> > 
>> > What do I mean by that...
>> > 
>> > The kernel network stack code path (a packet travels) is obviously
>> > larger than the instruction-cache (icache).  Today, every packet
>> > travel individually through the network stack, experiencing the exact
>> > same icache misses (as the previous packet).
>> ...
>> 
>> Is that actually true for modern server processors that have large i-cache.
>> While the total size of the networking code may well be larger, that
>> part used for transmitting data packets will be much be smaller and
>> could easily fit in the icache.
> 
> Yes, exactly. That is what I'm betting on. If I can split it into
> stages (e.g. part used for transmitting) that fits into icache then I
> should see a win.
> 
> The icache is still quite small 32Kb on modern server processors.  I
> don't know if smaller embedded processors also have icache and how
> large they are.  I speculate this approach would also be a benefit for
> them (if they have icache).
All of the router devices that I work with have icache. Typical sizes
are 32 or 64 KiB. FWIW, I'm really looking forward to having such
optimizations in the network stack ;)

- Felix