From: Anton Protopopov <a.s.protopopov@gmail.com>
To: Mykyta Yatsenko <mykyta.yatsenko5@gmail.com>
Cc: bpf@vger.kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org,
daniel@iogearbox.net, kernel-team@meta.com, eddyz87@gmail.com,
memxor@gmail.com, Mykyta Yatsenko <yatsenko@meta.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Speed up htab hashing for u32/u64 keys
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2026 16:45:22 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <arFfIh-vdGc9ylj_@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260921-hashtab_fast_hashfn-v1-1-f92ae72cefcd@meta.com>
On 26/09/21 08:28AM, Mykyta Yatsenko wrote:
> From: Mykyta Yatsenko <yatsenko@meta.com>
>
> Four- and eight-byte keys are common enough to warrant avoiding the
> generic jhash2() path. Fold JHASH_INITVAL and the key length into
> hashrnd when allocating maps with these key sizes, then use
> __jhash_nwords() during lookup.
>
> This preserves the jhash2() result while avoiding its length handling
> and repeated state setup.
>
> Measure this with six runs of:
>
> ./bench -w3 -d10 -a bpf-hashmap-lookup \
> --key_size KEY_SIZE --max_entries MAX_ENTRIES \
> --nr_entries NR_ENTRIES --nr_loops NR_LOOPS \
> --map_flags 0x40
>
> inside a vng guest with two vCPUs and 4 GiB of RAM. Keep each map 50%
> full with these workloads:
>
> max entries entries loops
> small 512 256 8,388,608
> medium 10,000 5,000 8,000,000
> large 100,000 50,000 8,000,000
>
> Mean throughput in million lookups per second is:
>
> Baseline:
> key size (bytes)
> 1 4 8 10
> small 87.55 85.65 102.20 85.74
> medium 120.88 79.02 89.12 76.52
> large 126.61 52.28 57.78 47.54
>
> Optimized:
> key size (bytes)
> 1 4 8 10
> small 85.97 106.06 129.24 84.47
> medium 115.97 91.30 101.41 74.17
> large 120.27 58.16 62.03 45.99
>
> Change:
> key size (bytes)
> 1 4 8 10
> small -1.80% +23.83% +26.46% -1.48%
> medium -4.06% +15.54% +13.79% -3.06%
> large -5.00% +11.24% +7.36% -3.26%
>
> The targeted four-byte lookups improve by 11-24%, and eight-byte
> lookups improve by 7-26%. Untargeted one- and ten-byte lookups are
> 1-5% slower, consistent with the extra key-size checks on those paths.
>
> For bigger key sizes the overhead of optimized key size checks
> should be less visible.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mykyta Yatsenko <yatsenko@meta.com>
> ---
> kernel/bpf/hashtab.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c b/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
> index 6f331c80130d..4f1dbd6ebc07 100644
> --- a/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
> +++ b/kernel/bpf/hashtab.c
> @@ -612,6 +612,13 @@ static struct bpf_map *htab_map_alloc(union bpf_attr *attr)
> htab->hashrnd = 0;
> else
> htab->hashrnd = get_random_u32();
> + /*
> + * Fold the jhash constant and key length into hashrnd once for the
> + * fixed-size fast paths instead of doing it on every lookup.
> + */
> + if (htab->map.key_size == sizeof(u32) ||
> + htab->map.key_size == sizeof(u64))
> + htab->hashrnd += JHASH_INITVAL + htab->map.key_size;
>
> htab_init_buckets(htab);
>
> @@ -679,9 +686,19 @@ static struct bpf_map *htab_map_alloc(union bpf_attr *attr)
>
> static inline u32 htab_map_hash(const void *key, u32 key_len, u32 hashrnd)
> {
> - if (likely(key_len % 4 == 0))
> + const u32 *k = key;
> + u32 b;
> +
> + if (key_len == sizeof(u32))
> + b = 0;
> + else if (key_len == sizeof(u64))
> + b = k[1];
> + else if (likely(key_len % 4 == 0))
> return jhash2(key, key_len / 4, hashrnd);
> - return jhash(key, key_len, hashrnd);
> + else
> + return jhash(key, key_len, hashrnd);
> +
> + return __jhash_nwords(k[0], b, 0, hashrnd);
> }
>
> static inline struct bucket *__select_bucket(struct bpf_htab *htab, u32 hash)
>
> ---
> base-commit: 6849a44e5946ebf646e82c6a0296840d2b3bda5f
> change-id: 20260916-hashtab_fast_hashfn-9e52b3c2276e
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Mykyta Yatsenko <yatsenko@meta.com>
>
Nice!
Acked-by: Anton Protopopov <a.s.protopopov@gmail.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-09-21 16:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-09-21 15:28 [PATCH bpf-next] bpf: Speed up htab hashing for u32/u64 keys Mykyta Yatsenko
2026-09-21 16:45 ` Anton Protopopov [this message]
[not found] ` <179000542526.3934731.994864591824564797@gmail.com>
2026-09-21 17:00 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2026-09-21 17:10 ` Mykyta Yatsenko
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=arFfIh-vdGc9ylj_@mail.gmail.com \
--to=a.s.protopopov@gmail.com \
--cc=andrii@kernel.org \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=eddyz87@gmail.com \
--cc=kernel-team@meta.com \
--cc=memxor@gmail.com \
--cc=mykyta.yatsenko5@gmail.com \
--cc=yatsenko@meta.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox