From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer via iovisor-dev <iovisor-dev-9jONkmmOlFHEE9lA1F8Ukti2O/JbrIOy@public.gmane.org>
To: "netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org"
<netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org>
Cc: Eric Dumazet
<eric.dumazet-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
Tom Herbert <tom-BjP2VixgY4xUbtYUoyoikg@public.gmane.org>,
"iovisor-dev-9jONkmmOlFHEE9lA1F8Ukti2O/JbrIOy@public.gmane.org"
<iovisor-dev-9jONkmmOlFHEE9lA1F8Ukti2O/JbrIOy@public.gmane.org>,
John Fastabend
<john.fastabend-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org>,
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs-jkUAjuhPggJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org>,
Daniel Borkmann
<borkmann-FeC+5ew28dpmcu3hnIyYJQ@public.gmane.org>,
David Miller <davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org>,
Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo-Cap9r6Oaw4JrovVCs/uTlw@public.gmane.org>
Subject: Explaining RX-stages for XDP
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 11:32:37 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160927113237.7138c097@redhat.com> (raw)
Let me try in a calm way (not like [1]) to explain how I imagine that
the XDP processing RX-stage should be implemented. As I've pointed out
before[2], I'm proposing splitting up the driver into RX-stages. This
is a mental-model change, I hope you can follow my "inception" attempt.
The basic concept behind this idea is, if the RX-ring contains
multiple "ready" packets, then the kernel was too slow, processing
incoming packets. Thus, switch into more efficient mode, which is a
"packet-vector" mode.
Today, our XDP micro-benchmarks looks amazing, and they are! But once
real-life intermixed traffic is used, then we loose the XDP I-cache
benefit. XDP is meant for DoS protection, and an attacker can easily
construct intermixed traffic. Why not fix this architecturally?
Most importantly concept: If XDP return XDP_PASS, do NOT pass the
packet up the network stack immediately (that would flush I-cache).
Instead store the packet for the next RX-stage. Basically splitting
the packet-vector into two packet-vectors, one for network-stack and
one for XDP. Thus, intermixed XDP vs. netstack not longer have effect
on XDP performance.
The reason for also creating an XDP packet-vector, is to move the
XDP_TX transmit code out of the XDP processing stage (and future
features). This maximize I-cache availability to the eBPF program,
and make eBPF performance more uniform across drivers.
Inception:
* Instead of individual packets, see it as a RX packet-vector.
* XDP should be seen as a stage *before* the network stack gets called.
If your mind can handle it: I'm NOT proposing a RX-vector of 64-packets.
I actually want N-packet per vector (8-16). As the NIC HW RX process
runs concurrently, and by the time it takes to process N-packets, more
packets have had a chance to arrive in the RX-ring queue.
--
Best regards,
Jesper Dangaard Brouertho
MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
[1] https://mid.mail-archive.com/netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org/msg127043.html
[2] http://lists.openwall.net/netdev/2016/01/15/51
[3] http://lists.openwall.net/netdev/2016/04/19/89
next reply other threads:[~2016-09-27 9:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-27 9:32 Jesper Dangaard Brouer via iovisor-dev [this message]
[not found] ` <20160927113237.7138c097-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2016-09-28 2:12 ` Explaining RX-stages for XDP Alexei Starovoitov via iovisor-dev
[not found] ` <20160928021242.GA77695-+o4/htvd0TDFYCXBM6kdu7fOX0fSgVTm@public.gmane.org>
2016-09-28 10:44 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer via iovisor-dev
[not found] ` <20160928124431.351d7180-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org>
2016-09-29 4:44 ` Alexei Starovoitov via iovisor-dev
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=20160927113237.7138c097@redhat.com \
--to=iovisor-dev-9jonkmmolfhee9la1f8ukti2o/jbrioy@public.gmane.org \
--cc=borkmann-FeC+5ew28dpmcu3hnIyYJQ@public.gmane.org \
--cc=brouer-H+wXaHxf7aLQT0dZR+AlfA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=davem-fT/PcQaiUtIeIZ0/mPfg9Q@public.gmane.org \
--cc=eric.dumazet-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=jhs-jkUAjuhPggJWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=john.fastabend-Re5JQEeQqe8AvxtiuMwx3w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org \
--cc=pablo-Cap9r6Oaw4JrovVCs/uTlw@public.gmane.org \
--cc=saeedm-VPRAkNaXOzVWk0Htik3J/w@public.gmane.org \
--cc=tom-BjP2VixgY4xUbtYUoyoikg@public.gmane.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).