From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] udp: use sk_protocol instead of pcflag to detect udplite sockets
Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2017 17:24:50 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1490973890.2845.18.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1490972953.8750.15.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
On Fri, 2017-03-31 at 08:09 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Fri, 2017-03-31 at 16:33 +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote:
>
> > I did the above to avoid increasing the udp_sock struct size; this will
> > costs more than a whole cacheline.
>
> Yes, but who cares :)
>
> Also note that we discussed about having a secondary receive queue in
> the future, to decouple the fact that producers/consumer have to grab a
> contended spinlock for every enqueued and dequeued packet.
>
> With a secondary queue, the consumer can transfer one queue into another
> in one batch.
>
> Or simply use ptr_ring / skb_array now these infras are available thanks
> to Michael.
>
> So we will likely increase UDP socket size in a near future...
>
> >
> > I did not hit others false sharing issues because:
> > - gro_receive/gro_complete are touched only for packets coming from
> > devices with udp tunnel offload enabled, that hit the tunnel offload
> > path on the nic; such packets will most probably land in the udp tunnel
> > and will not use 'forward_deficit'
>
>
> > - encap_destroy is touched only socket shutdown
> > - encap_rcv is protected by the 'udp_encap_needed' static key
> >
> > I think this latter is problematic, so I'm ok with the patch you
> > suggested.
> >
> > The above change could still make sense, the udp code is already
> > checking for udplite sockets with either pcflag and protocol;
> > testing always the same data will make the code more cleaner.
>
> Where are we testing sk->sk_prototocol in receive path ?
Sorry, I was ambiguous: sk->sk_protocol is not used yet; before the
socket lockup, __udp4_lib_rcv() and __udp6_lib_rcv() use the protocol
number provided by the caller to properly account udp vs udplite stats.
Cheers,
Paolo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-03-31 15:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-03-31 9:47 [PATCH net-next] udp: use sk_protocol instead of pcflag to detect udplite sockets Paolo Abeni
2017-03-31 13:25 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-03-31 14:33 ` Paolo Abeni
2017-03-31 15:09 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-03-31 15:24 ` Paolo Abeni [this message]
2017-03-31 15:03 ` David Laight
2017-03-31 15:24 ` Eric Dumazet
2017-04-02 3:12 ` 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=1490973890.2845.18.camel@redhat.com \
--to=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).