linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com (George Dunlap)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [Xen-devel] "tcp: refine TSO autosizing" causes performance regression on Xen
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 2015 18:23:25 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <552E9E8D.1080000@eu.citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1429115934.7346.107.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>

On 04/15/2015 05:38 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> My thoughts that instead of these long talks you should guys read the
> code :
> 
>                 /* TCP Small Queues :
>                  * Control number of packets in qdisc/devices to two packets / or ~1 ms.
>                  * This allows for :
>                  *  - better RTT estimation and ACK scheduling
>                  *  - faster recovery
>                  *  - high rates
>                  * Alas, some drivers / subsystems require a fair amount
>                  * of queued bytes to ensure line rate.
>                  * One example is wifi aggregation (802.11 AMPDU)
>                  */
>                 limit = max(2 * skb->truesize, sk->sk_pacing_rate >> 10);
>                 limit = min_t(u32, limit, sysctl_tcp_limit_output_bytes);
> 
> 
> Then you'll see that most of your questions are already answered.
> 
> Feel free to try to improve the behavior, if it does not hurt critical workloads
> like TCP_RR, where we we send very small messages, millions times per second.

First of all, with regard to critical workloads, once this patch gets
into distros, *normal TCP streams* on every VM running on Amazon,
Rackspace, Linode, &c will get a 30% hit in performance *by default*.
Normal TCP streams on xennet *are* a critical workload, and deserve the
same kind of accommodation as TCP_RR (if not more).  The same goes for
virtio_net.

Secondly, according to Stefano's and Jonathan's tests,
tcp_limit_output_bytes completely fixes the problem for Xen.

Which means that max(2*skb->truesize, sk->sk_pacing_rate >>10) is
*already* larger for Xen; that calculation mentioned in the comment is
*already* doing the right thing.

As Jonathan pointed out, sysctl_tcp_limit_output_bytes is overriding an
automatic TSQ calculation which is actually choosing an effective value
for xennet.

It certainly makes sense for sysctl_tcp_limit_output_bytes to be an
actual maximum limit.  I went back and looked at the original patch
which introduced it (46d3ceabd), and it looks to me like it was designed
to be a rough, quick estimate of "two packets outstanding" (by choosing
the maximum size of the packet, 64k, and multiplying it by two).

Now that you have a better algorithm -- the size of 2 actual packets or
the amount transmitted in 1ms -- it seems like the default
sysctl_tcp_limit_output_bytes should be higher, and let the automatic
TSQ you have on the first line throttle things down when necessary.

 -George

  reply	other threads:[~2015-04-15 17:23 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 37+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-04-09 15:46 "tcp: refine TSO autosizing" causes performance regression on Xen Stefano Stabellini
2015-04-09 16:16 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-09 16:36   ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-04-09 17:07     ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-13 10:56     ` [Xen-devel] " George Dunlap
2015-04-13 13:38       ` Jonathan Davies
2015-04-13 13:49       ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-15 13:43         ` George Dunlap
2015-04-15 16:38           ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-15 17:23             ` George Dunlap [this message]
2015-04-15 17:29               ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-15 17:41                 ` George Dunlap
2015-04-15 17:52                   ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-15 17:55                     ` Rick Jones
2015-04-15 18:08                       ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-15 18:19                         ` Rick Jones
2015-04-15 18:32                           ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-15 20:08                             ` Rick Jones
2015-04-15 18:04                     ` George Dunlap
2015-04-15 18:19                       ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-16  8:56                         ` George Dunlap
2015-04-16  9:20                           ` Daniel Borkmann
2015-04-16 10:01                             ` George Dunlap
2015-04-16 12:42                               ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-20 11:03                                 ` George Dunlap
2015-06-02  9:52                                 ` Wei Liu
2015-06-02 16:16                                   ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-16  9:22                           ` David Laight
2015-04-16 10:57                             ` George Dunlap
2015-04-15 17:41               ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-15 17:58                 ` Stefano Stabellini
2015-04-15 18:17                   ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-16  4:20                     ` Herbert Xu
2015-04-16  4:30                       ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-16 11:39                     ` George Dunlap
2015-04-16 12:16                       ` Eric Dumazet
2015-04-16 13:00                       ` Tim Deegan

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=552E9E8D.1080000@eu.citrix.com \
    --to=george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com \
    --cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).