All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sabrina Dubroca <sd@queasysnail.net>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Cc: David J Wilder <dwilder@us.ibm.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, edumazet@google.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] net: skb: Increasing allocation in __napi_alloc_skb() to 2k when needed.
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2024 22:49:00 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZilwPJ3QZC-7ideG@hog> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e67ea4ee50b7a5e4774d3e91a1bfb4d14bfa308e.camel@redhat.com>

2024-04-23, 09:56:33 +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On Fri, 2024-04-19 at 15:23 -0700, David J Wilder wrote:
> > When testing CONFIG_MAX_SKB_FRAGS=45 on ppc64le and x86_64 I ran into a
> > couple of issues.
> > 
> > __napi_alloc_skb() assumes its smallest fragment allocations will fit in
> > 1K. When CONFIG_MAX_SKB_FRAGS is increased this may no longer be true
> > resulting in __napi_alloc_skb() reverting to using page_frag_alloc().
> > This results in the return of the bug fixed in:
> > Commit 3226b158e67c ("net: avoid 32 x truesize under-estimation for
> > tiny skbs")
> > 
> > That commit insured that "small skb head fragments are kmalloc backed,
> > so that other objects in the slab page can be reused instead of being held
> > as long as skbs are sitting in socket queues."
> > 
> > On ppc64le the warning from napi_get_frags_check() is displayed when
> > CONFIG_MAX_SKB_FRAGS is set to 45. The purpose of the warning is to detect
> > when an increase of MAX_SKB_FRAGS has reintroduced the aforementioned bug.
> > Unfortunately on x86_64 this warning is not seen, even though it should be.
> > I found the warning was disabled by:
> > commit dbae2b062824 ("net: skb: introduce and use a single page frag
> > cache")
> > 
> > This RFC patch to __napi_alloc_skb() determines if an skbuff allocation
> > with a head fragment of size GRO_MAX_HEAD will fit in a 1k allocation,
> > increasing the allocation to 2k if needed.
> > 
> > I have functionally tested this patch, performance testing is still needed.
> > 
> > TBD: Remove the limitation on 4k page size from the single page frag cache
> > allowing ppc64le (64K page size) to benefit from this change.
> > 
> > TBD: I have not address the warning in napi_get_frags_check() on x86_64.
> > Will the warning still be needed once the other changes are completed?
> 
> 
> Thanks for the detailed analysis.
> 
> As mentioned by Eric in commit
> bf9f1baa279f0758dc2297080360c5a616843927, it should be now possible to
> revert dbae2b062824 without incurring in performance regressions for
> the relevant use-case. I had that on my todo list since a lot of time,
> but I was unable to allocate time for that.
> 
> I think such revert would be preferable. Would you be able to evaluate
> such option?

I don't think reverting dbae2b062824 would fix David's issue.

The problem is that with MAX_SKB_FRAGS=45, skb_shared_info becomes
huge, so 1024 is not enough for those small packets, and we use a
pagefrag instead of kmalloc, which makes napi_get_frags_check unhappy.

Even after reverting dbae2b062824, we would still go through the
pagefrag path and not __alloc_skb.

What about something like this?  (boot-tested on x86 only, but I
disabled NAPI_HAS_SMALL_PAGE_FRAG. no perf testing at all.)

-------- 8< --------
diff --git a/net/core/skbuff.c b/net/core/skbuff.c
index f85e6989c36c..88923b7b64fe 100644
--- a/net/core/skbuff.c
+++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
@@ -108,6 +108,8 @@ static struct kmem_cache *skbuff_ext_cache __ro_after_init;
 #define SKB_SMALL_HEAD_HEADROOM						\
 	SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(SKB_SMALL_HEAD_CACHE_SIZE)
 
+#define SKB_SMALL_HEAD_THRESHOLD (SKB_SMALL_HEAD_HEADROOM + NET_SKB_PAD + NET_IP_ALIGN)
+
 int sysctl_max_skb_frags __read_mostly = MAX_SKB_FRAGS;
 EXPORT_SYMBOL(sysctl_max_skb_frags);
 
@@ -726,7 +728,7 @@ struct sk_buff *__netdev_alloc_skb(struct net_device *dev, unsigned int len,
 	/* If requested length is either too small or too big,
 	 * we use kmalloc() for skb->head allocation.
 	 */
-	if (len <= SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(1024) ||
+	if (len <= SKB_SMALL_HEAD_THRESHOLD ||
 	    len > SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(PAGE_SIZE) ||
 	    (gfp_mask & (__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM | GFP_DMA))) {
 		skb = __alloc_skb(len, gfp_mask, SKB_ALLOC_RX, NUMA_NO_NODE);
@@ -802,7 +804,7 @@ struct sk_buff *napi_alloc_skb(struct napi_struct *napi, unsigned int len)
 	 * When the small frag allocator is available, prefer it over kmalloc
 	 * for small fragments
 	 */
-	if ((!NAPI_HAS_SMALL_PAGE_FRAG && len <= SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(1024)) ||
+	if ((!NAPI_HAS_SMALL_PAGE_FRAG && len <= SKB_SMALL_HEAD_THRESHOLD) ||
 	    len > SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(PAGE_SIZE) ||
 	    (gfp_mask & (__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM | GFP_DMA))) {
 		skb = __alloc_skb(len, gfp_mask, SKB_ALLOC_RX | SKB_ALLOC_NAPI,
-------- 8< --------

(__)napi_alloc_skb extends the GRO_MAX_HEAD size by NET_SKB_PAD +
NET_IP_ALIGN, so I added them here as well. Mainly this is reusing a
size that we know if big enough to fit a small header and whatever
size skb_shared_info is on the current build. Maybe this could be
max(SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(1024), <...>) to preserve the current behavior
on MAX_SKB_FRAGS=17, since in that case
SKB_WITH_OVERHEAD(1024) > SKB_SMALL_HEAD_HEADROOM

-- 
Sabrina


  reply	other threads:[~2024-04-24 20:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-04-19 22:23 [RFC PATCH] net: skb: Increasing allocation in __napi_alloc_skb() to 2k when needed David J Wilder
2024-04-23  7:56 ` Paolo Abeni
2024-04-24 20:49   ` Sabrina Dubroca [this message]
2024-04-24 20:56     ` Eric Dumazet
2024-04-26 18:25       ` David J Wilder
2024-04-26 18:50         ` Eric Dumazet
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2024-04-19 22:29 David J Wilder

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=ZilwPJ3QZC-7ideG@hog \
    --to=sd@queasysnail.net \
    --cc=dwilder@us.ibm.com \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=pabeni@redhat.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.