Re: [RFC] GRO scalability

Herbert Xu
2012-10-06T05:14:13Z

On Sat, Oct 06, 2012 at 07:08:46AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le samedi 06 octobre 2012 à 12:11 +0800, Herbert Xu a écrit :
> > On Fri, Oct 05, 2012 at 04:52:27PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > Current GRO cell is somewhat limited :
> > >
> > > - It uses a single list (napi->gro_list) of pending skbs
> > >
> > > - This list has a limit of 8 skbs (MAX_GRO_SKBS)
> > >
> > > - Workloads with lot of concurrent flows have small GRO hit rate but
> > > pay high overhead (in inet_gro_receive())
> > >
> > > - Increasing MAX_GRO_SKBS is not an option, because GRO
> > > overhead becomes too high.
> >
> > Yeah these were all meant to be addressed at some point.
> >
> > > - Packets can stay a long time held in GRO cell (there is
> > > no flush if napi never completes on a stressed cpu)
> >
> > This should never happen though. NAPI runs must always be
> > punctuated just to guarantee one card never hogs a CPU. Which
> > driver causes these behaviour?
>
> I believe its a generic issue, not specific to a driver.
>
> napi_gro_flush() is only called from napi_complete()
>
> Some drivers (marvell/skge.c & realtek/8139cp.c) calls it only because
> they 'inline' napi_complete()

So which driver has the potential of never doing napi_gro_flush?

Cheers,
--
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt