From: Nick Child <nnac123@linux.ibm.com>
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: nick.child@ibm.com, dave.taht@gmail.com,
Nick Child <nnac123@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: [RFC PATCH net-next 0/1] ibmveth: Implement BQL
Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2022 16:38:27 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20221024213828.320219-1-nnac123@linux.ibm.com> (raw)
Hello,
Labeled as RFC because I am unsure if adding Byte Queue Limits (BQL) is
positively effecting the ibmveth driver. BQL is common among network
drivers so I would like to incorporate it into the virtual ethernet
driver, ibmveth. But I am having trouble measuring its effects.
From my understanding (and please correct me if I am wrong), BQL will
use the number of packets sent to the NIC to approximate the minimum
number of packets to enqueue to a netdev_queue without starving the NIC.
As a result, bufferbloat in the networking queues are minimized which
may allow for smaller latencies.
After performing various netperf tests under differing loads and
priorities, I do not see any performance effect when comparing the
driver with and without BQL. The ibmveth driver is a virtual driver
which has an abstracted view of the NIC so I am comfortable without
seeing any performance deltas. That being said, I would like to know if
BQL is actually being enforced in some way. In other words, I would
like to observe a change in the number of queued bytes during BQL
implementations. Does anyone know of a mechanism to measure the length
of a netdev_queue?
I tried creating a BPF script[1] to track the bytes in a netdev_queue
but again am not seeing any difference with and without BQL. I do not
believe anything is wrong with BQL (it is more likely that my tracing
is bad) but I would like to have some evidence of BQL having a
positive effect on the device. Any recommendations or advice would be
greatly appreciated.
Thanks.
[1] https://github.com/nick-child-ibm/bpf_scripts/blob/main/bpftrace_queued_bytes.bt
Nick Child (1):
ibmveth: Implement BQL
drivers/net/ethernet/ibm/ibmveth.c | 8 +++++++-
1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
--
2.31.1
next reply other threads:[~2022-10-24 23:19 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-10-24 21:38 Nick Child [this message]
2022-10-24 21:38 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 1/1] ibmveth: Implement BQL Nick Child
2022-10-25 18:41 ` [RFC PATCH net-next 0/1] " Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-25 20:03 ` Nick Child
2022-10-25 22:10 ` Jakub Kicinski
2022-10-26 0:08 ` Dave Taht
2022-10-26 21:10 ` Nick Child
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=20221024213828.320219-1-nnac123@linux.ibm.com \
--to=nnac123@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=dave.taht@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nick.child@ibm.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).