From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com, jacob.e.keller@intel.com
Subject: [PATCH net-next V2] net: avoid irqsave in skb_defer_free_flush
Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2023 13:07:43 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <167421646327.1321776.7390743166998776914.stgit@firesoul> (raw)
The spin_lock irqsave/restore API variant in skb_defer_free_flush can
be replaced with the faster spin_lock irq variant, which doesn't need
to read and restore the CPU flags.
Using the unconditional irq "disable/enable" API variant is safe,
because the skb_defer_free_flush() function is only called during
NAPI-RX processing in net_rx_action(), where it is known the IRQs
are enabled.
Expected gain is 14 cycles from avoiding reading and restoring CPU
flags in a spin_lock_irqsave/restore operation, measured via a
microbencmark kernel module[1] on CPU E5-1650 v4 @ 3.60GHz.
Microbenchmark overhead of spin_lock+unlock:
- spin_lock_unlock_irq cost: 34 cycles(tsc) 9.486 ns
- spin_lock_unlock_irqsave cost: 48 cycles(tsc) 13.567 ns
We don't expect to see a measurable packet performance gain, as
skb_defer_free_flush() is called infrequently once per NIC device NAPI
bulk cycle and conditionally only if SKBs have been deferred by other
CPUs via skb_attempt_defer_free().
[1] https://github.com/netoptimizer/prototype-kernel/blob/master/kernel/lib/time_bench_sample.c
Reviewed-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
---
net/core/dev.c | 5 ++---
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
index cf78f35bc0b9..9c60190fe352 100644
--- a/net/core/dev.c
+++ b/net/core/dev.c
@@ -6616,17 +6616,16 @@ static int napi_threaded_poll(void *data)
static void skb_defer_free_flush(struct softnet_data *sd)
{
struct sk_buff *skb, *next;
- unsigned long flags;
/* Paired with WRITE_ONCE() in skb_attempt_defer_free() */
if (!READ_ONCE(sd->defer_list))
return;
- spin_lock_irqsave(&sd->defer_lock, flags);
+ spin_lock_irq(&sd->defer_lock);
skb = sd->defer_list;
sd->defer_list = NULL;
sd->defer_count = 0;
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&sd->defer_lock, flags);
+ spin_unlock_irq(&sd->defer_lock);
while (skb != NULL) {
next = skb->next;
next reply other threads:[~2023-01-20 12:08 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-01-20 12:07 Jesper Dangaard Brouer [this message]
2023-01-24 6:10 ` [PATCH net-next V2] net: avoid irqsave in skb_defer_free_flush patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
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=167421646327.1321776.7390743166998776914.stgit@firesoul \
--to=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=jacob.e.keller@intel.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.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