netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@oracle.com>
To: Rick Jones <rick.jones2@hpe.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ipsec impact on performance
Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 13:45:04 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20151201184504.GF21252@oracle.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <565DE446.2070609@hpe.com>

On (12/01/15 10:17), Rick Jones wrote:
> 
> What do the perf profiles show?  Presumably, loss of TSO/GSO means
> an increase in the per-packet costs, but if the ipsec path
> significantly increases the per-byte costs...

For ESP-null, there's actually very little work to do - we just
need to add the 8 byte ESP header with an spi and a seq#.. no
crypto work to do.. so the overhead *should* be minimal, else
we've painted ourself into a corner where we can't touch anything
including TCP options like md5.

perf profiles: I used perf tracepoints to instrument latency.
Yes, there is function call overhead for the xfrm path. So, for example,
the stack ends up being like this:
                          :
                  e5d2f2 ip_finish_output ([kerne.kallsyms])
                  75d6d0 ip_output ([kernel.kallsyms])
              7c08ad xfrm_output_resume ([kernel.kallsyms])
              7c0aae xfrm_output ([kernel.kallsyms])
              7b1bdd xfrm4_output_finish ([kernel.kallsyms])
              7b1c7e __xfrm4_output ([kernel.kallsyms])
              7b1dbe xfrm4_output ([kernel.kallsyms])
                  75bac4 ip_local_out ([kernel.kallsyms])
                  75c012 ip_queue_xmit ([kernel.kallsyms])
                  7736a3 tcp_transmit_skb ([kernel.kallsyms])
	                  :
where the detour into xfrm has been indented out, and esp_output
gets called out of xfrm_output_resume(). And as I said, there's
some nickels-and-dimes of perf to be squeezed out from 
better memory management in xfrm, but the fact that it doesnt move
beyond 3 Gbps strikes me as some other bottleneck/serialization.

> Short of a perf profile, I suppose one way to probe for per-packet
> versus per-byte would be to up the MTU.  That should reduce the
> per-packet costs while keeping the per-byte roughly the same.

actually the hack/rfc I sent out does help (in that it almost
doubles the existing 1.8 Gbps). Problem is that this cliff is much
steeper than that, and there's more hidden somewhere.

--Sowmini

  reply	other threads:[~2015-12-01 18:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-01 17:59 ipsec impact on performance Sowmini Varadhan
2015-12-01 18:17 ` Rick Jones
2015-12-01 18:45   ` Sowmini Varadhan [this message]
2015-12-01 18:50     ` Rick Jones
2015-12-01 19:01       ` Sowmini Varadhan
2015-12-02  0:56   ` David Ahern
2015-12-02  1:09     ` Sowmini Varadhan
2015-12-02  1:25       ` David Ahern
2015-12-01 18:18 ` Tom Herbert
2015-12-01 18:37   ` Sowmini Varadhan
2015-12-02 11:56     ` David Laight
2015-12-02 12:11       ` Sowmini Varadhan
2015-12-02 12:41         ` David Laight
2015-12-02 13:25           ` Sowmini Varadhan
2015-12-02 20:50           ` Sowmini Varadhan
2015-12-02 21:07             ` Tom Herbert
2015-12-02 21:12               ` Sowmini Varadhan
2015-12-02 21:44                 ` Tom Herbert
2015-12-02 21:47                   ` Sowmini Varadhan
2015-12-02 22:01                     ` Tom Herbert
2015-12-02 22:08                       ` Sowmini Varadhan
2015-12-02 22:25                 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-12-03  1:31       ` Rick Jones
2015-12-02  6:53 ` Steffen Klassert
2015-12-02 12:05   ` Sowmini Varadhan
2015-12-03  8:45     ` Steffen Klassert
2015-12-03 11:38       ` Sowmini Varadhan
2015-12-03 11:47         ` Steffen Klassert
2015-12-07  8:40         ` Steffen Klassert
2015-12-07 11:27           ` Sowmini Varadhan
2015-12-08 11:32             ` Steffen Klassert
2015-12-08 11:51               ` Sowmini Varadhan
2015-12-03 19:33 ` David Miller
2015-12-03 20:08   ` Eric Dumazet
2015-12-03 20:32   ` Sowmini Varadhan
2015-12-04  5:18 ` Sandy Harris

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=20151201184504.GF21252@oracle.com \
    --to=sowmini.varadhan@oracle.com \
    --cc=linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rick.jones2@hpe.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).