netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Willem de Bruijn <willemb@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/udp: do not touch skb->peeked unless really needed
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 19:31:01 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1481049061.7129.18.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1481046434.18162.599.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>

On Tue, 2016-12-06 at 09:47 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-12-06 at 18:08 +0100, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> > On Tue, 2016-12-06 at 11:34 +0100, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2016-12-05 at 09:57 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > > From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
> > > > 
> > > > In UDP recvmsg() path we currently access 3 cache lines from an skb
> > > > while holding receive queue lock, plus another one if packet is
> > > > dequeued, since we need to change skb->next->prev
> > > > 
> > > > 1st cache line (contains ->next/prev pointers, offsets 0x00 and 0x08)
> > > > 2nd cache line (skb->len & skb->peeked, offsets 0x80 and 0x8e)
> > > > 3rd cache line (skb->truesize/users, offsets 0xe0 and 0xe4)
> > > > 
> > > > skb->peeked is only needed to make sure 0-length packets are properly
> > > > handled while MSG_PEEK is operated.
> > > > 
> > > > I had first the intent to remove skb->peeked but the "MSG_PEEK at
> > > > non-zero offset" support added by Sam Kumar makes this not possible.
> > > > 
> > > > This patch avoids one cache line miss during the locked section, when
> > > > skb->len and skb->peeked do not have to be read.
> > > > 
> > > > It also avoids the skb_set_peeked() cost for non empty UDP datagrams.
> > > > 
> > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
> > > 
> > > Thank you for all the good work.
> > > 
> > > After all your improvement, I see the cacheline miss in inet_recvmsg()
> > > as a major perf offender for the user space process in the udp flood
> > > scenario due to skc_rxhash sharing the same sk_drops cacheline.
> > > 
> > > Using an udp-specific drop counter (and an sk_drops accessor to wrap
> > > sk_drops access where needed), we could avoid such cache miss. With that
> > > - patch for udp.h only below - I get 3% improvement on top of all the
> > > pending udp patches, and the gain should be more relevant after the 2
> > > queues rework. What do you think ?
> > 
> > Here follow what I'm experimenting. 
> 
> Well, new socket layout makes this kind of patches not really needed ?
> 
> 	/* --- cacheline 2 boundary (128 bytes) was 8 bytes ago --- */
> 	socket_lock_t              sk_lock;              /*  0x88  0x20 */
> 	atomic_t                   sk_drops;             /*  0xa8   0x4 */
> 	int                        sk_rcvlowat;          /*  0xac   0x4 */
> 	struct sk_buff_head        sk_error_queue;       /*  0xb0  0x18 */
> 	/* --- cacheline 3 boundary (192 bytes) was 8 bytes ago --- */

cacheline 2 boundary (128 bytes) is 8 bytes before sk_lock: cacheline 2
includes also skc_refcnt and skc_rxhash from __sk_common (I use 'pahole
-E ...' to get the full blown output). skc_rxhash is read for each
packet in inet_recvmsg()/sock_rps_record_flow() if CONFIG_RPS is set. I
get a cache miss per packet there and inet_recvmsg() in my test takes
about 8% of the whole u/s processing time.

> I mentioned at some point that we can very easily instruct 
> sock_skb_set_dropcount() to not read sk_drops if application
> does not care about getting sk_drops ;)
> 
> https://patchwork.kernel.org/patch/9405677/
> 
> Now sk_drops was moved, the plan is to submit this patch in an official way.

Looking forward to that!

Thank you,

Paolo

  reply	other threads:[~2016-12-06 18:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-12-05  2:43 [RFC] udp: some improvements on RX path Eric Dumazet
2016-12-05 13:22 ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-05 14:28   ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-05 15:37     ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2016-12-05 15:54       ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-05 17:57     ` [PATCH] net/udp: do not touch skb->peeked unless really needed Eric Dumazet
2016-12-06  9:53       ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-06 12:10         ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-06 14:35           ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-06 14:34         ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-06 10:34       ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-06 17:08         ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-06 17:47           ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-06 18:31             ` Paolo Abeni [this message]
2016-12-06 18:58               ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-06 19:16                 ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-06 19:35                   ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-07  3:32                     ` [PATCH net-next] net: sock_rps_record_flow() is for connected sockets Eric Dumazet
2016-12-07  6:47                       ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-07  7:57                         ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-07 14:26                           ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-08 17:49                             ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-07 14:29                           ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-07 15:59                             ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-08 18:50                             ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-08 19:32                               ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-08 19:20                           ` Edward Cree
2016-12-08 17:49                         ` Tom Herbert
2016-12-08 18:02                           ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-08 19:15                             ` Tom Herbert
2016-12-08 20:05                               ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-12-08 20:30                                 ` Tom Herbert
2016-12-08 20:44                                 ` Tom Herbert
2016-12-08 18:07                           ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-07  7:59                       ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-07 13:58                         ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-07 15:47                       ` David Miller
2016-12-07 17:09           ` [PATCH] net/udp: do not touch skb->peeked unless really needed David Laight
2016-12-07 17:32             ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-07 17:37               ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-12-07 17:52                 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-07 17:55                 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-06 15:42       ` David Miller

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=1481049061.7129.18.camel@redhat.com \
    --to=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=willemb@google.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).