All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@kernel.org>
To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@kernel.org>,
	Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@linux.dev>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] bpf: call get_random_u32() for random integers
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2022 13:50:10 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87lenku265.fsf@toke.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Y451ENAK7BQQDJc/@zx2c4.com>

"Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@zx2c4.com> writes:

> On Mon, Dec 05, 2022 at 11:21:51PM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> On 12/5/22 7:15 PM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
>> > Since BPF's bpf_user_rnd_u32() was introduced, there have been three
>> > significant developments in the RNG: 1) get_random_u32() returns the
>> > same types of bytes as /dev/urandom, eliminating the distinction between
>> > "kernel random bytes" and "userspace random bytes", 2) get_random_u32()
>> > operates mostly locklessly over percpu state, 3) get_random_u32() has
>> > become quite fast.
>> 
>> Wrt "quite fast", do you have a comparison between the two? Asking as its
>> often used in networking worst case on per packet basis (e.g. via XDP), would
>> be useful to state concrete numbers for the two on a given machine.
>
> Median of 25 cycles vs median of 38, on my Tiger Lake machine. So a
> little slower, but too small of a difference to matter.

Assuming a 3Ghz CPU clock (so 3 cycles per nanosecond), that's an
additional overhead of ~4.3 ns. When processing 10 Gbps at line rate
with small packets, the per-packet processing budget is 67.2 ns, so
those extra 4.3 ns will eat up ~6.4% of the budget.

So in other words, "too small a difference to matter" is definitely not
true in general. It really depends on the use case; if someone is using
this to, say, draw per-packet random numbers to compute a drop frequency
on ingress, that extra processing time will most likely result in a
quite measurable drop in performance.

-Toke

  reply	other threads:[~2022-12-06 12:50 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2022-12-05 18:15 [PATCH] bpf: call get_random_u32() for random integers Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-12-05 22:21 ` Daniel Borkmann
2022-12-05 22:47   ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-12-06 12:50     ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen [this message]
2022-12-06 12:59       ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-12-06 13:26         ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2022-12-06 13:30           ` Jason A. Donenfeld
2022-12-06 13:53             ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen

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=87lenku265.fsf@toke.dk \
    --to=toke@kernel.org \
    --cc=Jason@zx2c4.com \
    --cc=andrii@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=martin.lau@linux.dev \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    /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.