From: Simon Horman <horms@verge.net.au>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jay Vosburgh <fubar@us.ibm.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: bonding: flow control regression [was Re: bridging: flow control regression]
Date: Tue, 2 Nov 2010 17:46:48 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20101102084646.GA23774@verge.net.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1288683057.2660.154.camel@edumazet-laptop>
On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 08:30:57AM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Le mardi 02 novembre 2010 à 16:03 +0900, Simon Horman a écrit :
> > On Tue, Nov 02, 2010 at 05:53:42AM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > Le mardi 02 novembre 2010 à 11:06 +0900, Simon Horman a écrit :
> > >
> > > > Thanks for the explanation.
> > > > I'm not entirely sure how much of a problem this is in practice.
> > >
> > > Maybe for virtual devices (tunnels, bonding, ...), it would make sense
> > > to delay the orphaning up to the real device.
> >
> > That was my initial thought. Could you give me some guidance
> > on how that might be done so I can try and make a patch to test?
> >
> > > But if the socket send buffer is very large, it would defeat the flow
> > > control any way...
> >
> > I'm primarily concerned about a situation where
> > UDP packets are sent as fast as possible, indefinitely.
> > And in that scenario, I think it would need to be a rather large buffer.
> >
>
> Please try following patch, thanks.
Thanks Eric, that seems to resolve the problem that I was seeing.
With your patch I see:
No bonding
# netperf -c -4 -t UDP_STREAM -H 172.17.60.216 -l 30 -- -m 1472
UDP UNIDIRECTIONAL SEND TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to 172.17.60.216 (172.17.60.216) port 0 AF_INET
Socket Message Elapsed Messages CPU Service
Size Size Time Okay Errors Throughput Util Demand
bytes bytes secs # # 10^6bits/sec % SU us/KB
116736 1472 30.00 2438413 0 957.2 8.52 1.458
129024 30.00 2438413 957.2 -1.00 -1.000
With bonding (one slave, the interface used in the test above)
netperf -c -4 -t UDP_STREAM -H 172.17.60.216 -l 30 -- -m 1472
UDP UNIDIRECTIONAL SEND TEST from 0.0.0.0 (0.0.0.0) port 0 AF_INET to 172.17.60.216 (172.17.60.216) port 0 AF_INET
Socket Message Elapsed Messages CPU Service
Size Size Time Okay Errors Throughput Util Demand
bytes bytes secs # # 10^6bits/sec % SU us/KB
116736 1472 30.00 2438390 0 957.1 8.97 1.535
129024 30.00 2438390 957.1 -1.00 -1.000
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-11-02 8:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-11-01 12:29 bridging: flow control regression Simon Horman
2010-11-01 12:59 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-11-02 2:06 ` bonding: flow control regression [was Re: bridging: flow control regression] Simon Horman
2010-11-02 4:53 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-11-02 7:03 ` Simon Horman
2010-11-02 7:30 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-11-02 8:46 ` Simon Horman [this message]
2010-11-02 9:29 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-11-06 9:25 ` Simon Horman
2010-12-08 13:22 ` Simon Horman
2010-12-08 13:50 ` Eric Dumazet
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=20101102084646.GA23774@verge.net.au \
--to=horms@verge.net.au \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=fubar@us.ibm.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).