netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Willy Tarreau <w@1wt.eu>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Cc: Ben Greear <greearb@candelatech.com>, netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: TCP many-connection regression between 4.7 and 4.13 kernels.
Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2018 19:27:37 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180122182737.GA18218@1wt.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1516644966.3478.10.camel@gmail.com>

Hi Eric,

On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 10:16:06AM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Mon, 2018-01-22 at 09:28 -0800, Ben Greear wrote:
> > My test case is to have 6 processes each create 5000 TCP IPv4 connections to each other
> > on a system with 16GB RAM and send slow-speed data.  This works fine on a 4.7 kernel, but
> > will not work at all on a 4.13.  The 4.13 first complains about running out of tcp memory,
> > but even after forcing those values higher, the max connections we can get is around 15k.
> > 
> > Both kernels have my out-of-tree patches applied, so it is possible it is my fault
> > at this point.
> > 
> > Any suggestions as to what this might be caused by, or if it is fixed in more recent kernels?
> > 
> > I will start bisecting in the meantime...
> > 
> 
> Hi Ben
> 
> Unfortunately I have no idea.
> 
> Are you using loopback flows, or have I misunderstood you ?
> 
> How loopback connections can be slow-speed ?

A few quick points : I have not noticed this on 4.9, which we use with
pretty satisfying performance (typically around 100k conn/s). However
during some recent tests I did around the meltdown fixes on 4.15, I
noticed a high connect() or bind() cost to find a local port when
running on the loopback, that I didn't have the time to compare to
older kernels. However, strace clearly showed that bind() (or connect()
if bind was not used) could take as much as 2-3 ms as source ports were
filling up.

To be clear, it was just a quick observation and anything could be wrong
there, including my tests. I'm just saying this in case it matches anything
Ben has observed. I can try to get more info if that helps, but it could be
a different case.

Cheers,
Willy

  reply	other threads:[~2018-01-22 18:27 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-01-22 17:28 TCP many-connection regression between 4.7 and 4.13 kernels Ben Greear
2018-01-22 18:16 ` Eric Dumazet
2018-01-22 18:27   ` Willy Tarreau [this message]
2018-01-22 18:30   ` Ben Greear
2018-01-22 18:44     ` Ben Greear
2018-01-22 18:46     ` Josh Hunt
2018-01-23 22:06       ` Ben Greear
2018-01-23 21:49   ` TCP many-connection regression (bisected to 4.5.0-rc2+) Ben Greear
2018-01-23 22:07     ` Eric Dumazet
2018-01-23 22:09       ` Ben Greear
2018-01-23 22:29         ` Eric Dumazet
2018-01-23 23:10           ` Ben Greear
2018-01-23 23:21             ` Eric Dumazet
2018-01-23 23:27               ` Ben Greear
2018-01-24  0:05                 ` Ben Greear

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=20180122182737.GA18218@1wt.eu \
    --to=w@1wt.eu \
    --cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
    --cc=greearb@candelatech.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).