From: Jon Maloy <jmaloy@redhat.com>
To: Menglong Dong <menglong8.dong@gmail.com>
Cc: ying.xue@windriver.com, David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
etdev@vger.kernel.org, tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: The value of FB_MTU eats two pages
Date: Wed, 2 Jun 2021 15:50:27 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <e91baaba-e00a-4b16-0787-e9460dacfbb9@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CADxym3baupJJ7Q9otxtoQ-DH5e-J2isg-LZj2CsOqRPo70AL4A@mail.gmail.com>
On 6/1/21 10:18 AM, Menglong Dong wrote:
> Hello!
>
> I have a question about the value of FB_MTU in tipc, how does the '3744' form?
> I notice that it is used in 'tipc_msg_build()' when memory allocation
> fails, and it
> tries to fall back to a smaller MTU to avoid unnecessary sending failures.
>
> However, the size of the data allocated will be more than 4096 when FB_MTU
> is 3744. I did a rough calculation, the size of data will more than 4200:
>
> (FB_MTU + TIPCHDR + BUF_HEADROOM + sizeof(struct skb_shared_info))
>
> Therefore, 8192 will be allocated from slab, and about 4000 of it will
> not be used.
>
> FB_MTU is used for low memory, and I think eating two pages will make it worse.
> Do I miss something?
>
> Thanks!
> Menglong Dong
>
Hi Dong,
The value is based on empiric knowledge.
When I determined it I made a small loop in a kernel driver where I
allocated skbs (using tipc_buf_acquire) with an increasing size
(incremented with 1 each iteration), and then printed out the
corresponding truesize.
That gave the value we are using now.
Now, when re-running the test I get a different value, so something has
obviously changed since then.
[ 1622.158586] skb(513) =>> truesize 2304, prev skb(512) => prev
truesize 1280
[ 1622.162074] skb(1537) =>> truesize 4352, prev skb(1536) => prev
truesize 2304
[ 1622.165984] skb(3585) =>> truesize 8448, prev skb(3584) => prev
truesize 4352
As you can see, the optimal value now, for an x86_64 machine compiled
with gcc, is 3584 bytes, not 3744.
Feel free to post a patch for this if you want to.
Thanks
///Jon Maloy
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-02 19:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-01 14:18 The value of FB_MTU eats two pages Menglong Dong
2021-06-02 19:50 ` Jon Maloy [this message]
2021-06-03 2:26 ` Menglong Dong
2021-06-03 13:08 ` Jon Maloy
2021-06-03 14:54 ` Menglong Dong
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=e91baaba-e00a-4b16-0787-e9460dacfbb9@redhat.com \
--to=jmaloy@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=etdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=menglong8.dong@gmail.com \
--cc=tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net \
--cc=ying.xue@windriver.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.