Netdev List
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, hkchu@google.com,
	mst@redhat.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next rfc 1/3] net: avoid high order memory allocation for queues by using flex array
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2013 23:31:58 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1371623518.3252.267.camel@edumazet-glaptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1371620452-49349-2-git-send-email-jasowang@redhat.com>

On Wed, 2013-06-19 at 13:40 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> Currently, we use kcalloc to allocate rx/tx queues for a net device which could
> be easily lead to a high order memory allocation request when initializing a
> multiqueue net device. We can simply avoid this by switching to use flex array
> which always allocate at order zero.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/netdevice.h |   13 ++++++----
>  net/core/dev.c            |   57 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
>  net/core/net-sysfs.c      |   15 +++++++----
>  3 files changed, 58 insertions(+), 27 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> index 09b4188..c0b5d04 100644
> --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
> +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> @@ -32,6 +32,7 @@
>  #include <linux/atomic.h>
>  #include <asm/cache.h>
>  #include <asm/byteorder.h>
> +#include <linux/flex_array.h>
>  
>  #include <linux/percpu.h>
>  #include <linux/rculist.h>
> @@ -1230,7 +1231,7 @@ struct net_device {
>  
> 
>  #ifdef CONFIG_RPS
> -	struct netdev_rx_queue	*_rx;
> +	struct flex_array	*_rx;
>  
>  	/* Number of RX queues allocated at register_netdev() time */
>  	unsigned int		num_rx_queues;
> @@ -1250,7 +1251,7 @@ struct net_device {
>  /*
>   * Cache lines mostly used on transmit path
>   */
> -	struct netdev_queue	*_tx ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
> +	struct flex_array	*_tx ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
>  

Using flex_array and adding overhead in this super critical part of
network stack, only to avoid order-1 allocations done in GFP_KERNEL
context is simply insane.

We can revisit this in 2050 if we ever need order-4 allocations or so,
and still use 4K pages.

  reply	other threads:[~2013-06-19  6:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-06-19  5:40 [net-next rfc 0/3] increase the limit of tuntap queues Jason Wang
2013-06-19  5:40 ` [net-next rfc 1/3] net: avoid high order memory allocation for queues by using flex array Jason Wang
2013-06-19  6:31   ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2013-06-19  7:14     ` Jason Wang
2013-06-19  9:11     ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-06-19  9:56       ` Eric Dumazet
2013-06-19 12:22         ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-06-19 15:40         ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-06-19 15:58           ` Eric Dumazet
2013-06-19 16:06             ` David Laight
2013-06-19 16:28               ` Eric Dumazet
2013-06-19 18:07             ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-06-20  8:15               ` [PATCH net-next] net: allow large number of tx queues Eric Dumazet
2013-06-20  8:35                 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-06-21  6:41                   ` Jason Wang
2013-06-21  7:12                     ` Eric Dumazet
2013-06-23 10:29                       ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2013-06-24  6:57                 ` David Miller
2013-06-20  5:14         ` [net-next rfc 1/3] net: avoid high order memory allocation for queues by using flex array Jason Wang
2013-06-20  6:05           ` Eric Dumazet
2013-06-19  5:40 ` [net-next rfc 2/3] tuntap: reduce the size of tun_struct " Jason Wang
2013-06-19  5:40 ` [net-next rfc 3/3] tuntap: increase the max queues to 16 Jason Wang
2013-06-19  6:34   ` Eric Dumazet
2013-06-19  7:15     ` Jason Wang
2013-06-19 19:16     ` Jerry Chu

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=1371623518.3252.267.camel@edumazet-glaptop \
    --to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=hkchu@google.com \
    --cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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