From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (lindbergh.monkeyblade.net [23.128.96.19]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C7D5C6FC9 for ; Mon, 15 May 2023 09:12:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from esa.microchip.iphmx.com (esa.microchip.iphmx.com [68.232.154.123]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 741173C0D for ; Mon, 15 May 2023 02:12:34 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=microchip.com; i=@microchip.com; q=dns/txt; s=mchp; t=1684141955; x=1715677955; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:mime-version; bh=lrc0pTEAddZiQ2vCBiYrg9JTYezqRYmprkyNEGo2zgI=; b=b5Txa3/TADahvdq9gMlhNYGaQSu38wBweDuync3XUQYvN4mYE1uJYdrq XaSvXsNmdkbeypOpg2oBqhwG8R5UGn5zpeB4DhzLR7Hc2AhBxNfSJnCYj TimokSepr2Bs8J355csqJo3vnf7UxRJ9h2w2Q/+sDGgZEuWy2OiPgRedy KDMLWlIC3uCilBjm68sdLsid2eyFxQAV0DJJINB3ACHEt0YZt84QvHuEh QtsZMfNG7W3Bo/MlRoV9nomQIOTbCnnS3AJCsNhQRZc8b/wTLG6uDQS10 rXXli3SSLOYYxNlYodvOaVsoQJIBrPgq8VQErgURLjfz0YuPcOgEwfhOm w==; X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.99,276,1677567600"; d="scan'208";a="211263610" X-Amp-Result: SKIPPED(no attachment in message) Received: from unknown (HELO email.microchip.com) ([170.129.1.10]) by esa4.microchip.iphmx.com with ESMTP/TLS/AES256-SHA256; 15 May 2023 02:12:30 -0700 Received: from chn-vm-ex04.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.152) by chn-vm-ex01.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.143) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2507.21; Mon, 15 May 2023 02:12:27 -0700 Received: from localhost (10.10.115.15) by chn-vm-ex04.mchp-main.com (10.10.85.152) with Microsoft SMTP Server id 15.1.2507.21 via Frontend Transport; Mon, 15 May 2023 02:12:27 -0700 Date: Mon, 15 May 2023 11:12:26 +0200 From: Horatiu Vultur To: , Subject: Performance regression on lan966x when extracting frames Message-ID: <20230515091226.sd2sidyjll64jjay@soft-dev3-1> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_HIGH, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,DKIM_VALID_EF,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_NONE,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Hi, I have noticed that on the HEAD of net-next[0] there is a performance drop for lan966x when extracting frames towards the CPU. Lan966x has a Cortex A7 CPU. All the tests are done using iperf3 command like this: 'iperf3 -c 10.97.10.1 -R' So on net-next, I can see the following: [ 5] 0.00-10.01 sec 473 MBytes 396 Mbits/sec 456 sender And it gets around ~97000 interrupts. While going back to the commit[1], I can see the following: [ 5] 0.00-10.02 sec 632 MBytes 529 Mbits/sec 11 sender And it gets around ~1000 interrupts. I have done a little bit of searching and I have noticed that this commit [2] introduce the regression. I have tried to revert this commit on net-next and tried again, then I can see much better results but not exactly the same: [ 5] 0.00-10.01 sec 616 MBytes 516 Mbits/sec 0 sender And it gets around ~700 interrupts. So my question is, was I supposed to change something in lan966x driver? or is there a bug in lan966x driver that pop up because of this change? Any advice will be great. Thanks! [0] befcc1fce564 ("sfc: fix use-after-free in efx_tc_flower_record_encap_match()") [1] d4671cb96fa3 ("Merge branch 'lan966x-tx-rx-improve'") [2] 8b43fd3d1d7d ("net: optimize ____napi_schedule() to avoid extra NET_RX_SOFTIRQ") -- /Horatiu