From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: gfree.wind@vip.163.com
Cc: davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: rps: Add the rfs_needed check when record flow hash
Date: Thu, 25 May 2017 07:55:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1495724103.6465.98.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1495611359-118199-1-git-send-email-gfree.wind@vip.163.com>
On Wed, 2017-05-24 at 15:35 +0800, gfree.wind@vip.163.com wrote:
> From: Gao Feng <gfree.wind@vip.163.com>
>
> There are two spots which invoke the sock_rps_record_flow_hash, one is
> sock_rps_record_flow which has already checked rfs_needed. But the other
> is tun_flow_update which doesn't check if the rfs is enabled.
>
> Now rename the original function sock_rps_record_flow_hash to
> _sock_rps_record_flow_hash, and add one helper func which checks the
> rfs_needed.
>
> The perf result of two functions is following.
> When rfs is disabled, it could enhance 58% performance with checking
> rfs_needed.
> When rfs is enabled, the performanc is lower than current about 29%.
>
> Because the RFS is disabled by default. I think it is useful to tun
> driver.
>
> The follow is test statistics.
> Signed-off-by: Gao Feng <gfree.wind@vip.163.com>
> ---
> include/net/sock.h | 12 ++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/include/net/sock.h b/include/net/sock.h
> index 3467d9e..584bb9a 100644
> --- a/include/net/sock.h
> +++ b/include/net/sock.h
> @@ -910,7 +910,7 @@ static inline void sk_incoming_cpu_update(struct sock *sk)
> sk->sk_incoming_cpu = raw_smp_processor_id();
> }
>
> -static inline void sock_rps_record_flow_hash(__u32 hash)
> +static inline void _sock_rps_record_flow_hash(__u32 hash)
> {
> #ifdef CONFIG_RPS
> struct rps_sock_flow_table *sock_flow_table;
> @@ -922,6 +922,14 @@ static inline void sock_rps_record_flow_hash(__u32 hash)
> #endif
> }
>
> +static inline void sock_rps_record_flow_hash(__u32 hash)
> +{
> +#ifdef CONFIG_RPS
> + if (static_key_false(&rfs_needed))
> + _sock_rps_record_flow_hash(hash);
> +#endif
Seems that after your patch, sock_rps_record_flow_hash() is no longer
needed/used.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-05-25 14:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-24 7:35 [PATCH net-next] net: rps: Add the rfs_needed check when record flow hash gfree.wind
2017-05-25 14:55 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2017-05-25 17:11 ` David Miller
2017-05-26 0:32 ` Gao Feng
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=1495724103.6465.98.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com \
--to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=gfree.wind@vip.163.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