From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: brouer@redhat.com, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] udp: some improvements on RX path.
Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 16:37:11 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20161205163711.44b01c3a@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1480948133.18162.527.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
On Mon, 05 Dec 2016 06:28:53 -0800 Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-12-05 at 14:22 +0100, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, 2016-12-04 at 18:43 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
[...]
> > > But I also want to work on the idea I gave few days back, having a
> > > separate queue and use splice to transfer the 'softirq queue' into
> > > a calm queue in a different cache line.
> > >
> > > I expect a 50 % performance increase under load, maybe 1.5 Mpps.
I also have high hopes for such a solution. I'm very excited that you
are working on this! :-)
> > It should work nicely under contention, but won't that increase the
> > overhead for the uncontended/single flow scenario ? the user space
> > reader needs to acquire 2 lock when splicing the 'softirq queue'.
> > On my system ksoftirqd and the u/s process work at similar speeds,
> > so splicing will happen quite often.
>
> Well, the splice would happen only if you have more than one message
> in the softirq queue. So no real overhead for uncontended flow
> scenario.
>
>
> This reminds me of the busylock I added in __dev_xmit_skb(), which
> basically is acquired only when we detect a possible contention on
> qdisc lock.
Do you think the splice technique would, have the same performance
benefit as having a MPMC queue with separate enqueue and dequeue locking?
(like we have with skb_array/ptr_ring that avoids cache bouncing)?
--
Best regards,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer
MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-05 15:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-12-05 2:43 [RFC] udp: some improvements on RX path Eric Dumazet
2016-12-05 13:22 ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-05 14:28 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-05 15:37 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer [this message]
2016-12-05 15:54 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-05 17:57 ` [PATCH] net/udp: do not touch skb->peeked unless really needed Eric Dumazet
2016-12-06 9:53 ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-06 12:10 ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-06 14:35 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-06 14:34 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-06 10:34 ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-06 17:08 ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-06 17:47 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-06 18:31 ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-06 18:58 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-06 19:16 ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-06 19:35 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-07 3:32 ` [PATCH net-next] net: sock_rps_record_flow() is for connected sockets Eric Dumazet
2016-12-07 6:47 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-07 7:57 ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-07 14:26 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-08 17:49 ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-07 14:29 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-07 15:59 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-08 18:50 ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-08 19:32 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-08 19:20 ` Edward Cree
2016-12-08 17:49 ` Tom Herbert
2016-12-08 18:02 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-08 19:15 ` Tom Herbert
2016-12-08 20:05 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-12-08 20:30 ` Tom Herbert
2016-12-08 20:44 ` Tom Herbert
2016-12-08 18:07 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-07 7:59 ` Paolo Abeni
2016-12-07 13:58 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-07 15:47 ` David Miller
2016-12-07 17:09 ` [PATCH] net/udp: do not touch skb->peeked unless really needed David Laight
2016-12-07 17:32 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-07 17:37 ` Hannes Frederic Sowa
2016-12-07 17:52 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-07 17:55 ` Eric Dumazet
2016-12-06 15:42 ` David Miller
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=20161205163711.44b01c3a@redhat.com \
--to=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).