From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (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 3D5874683 for ; Tue, 5 Mar 2024 15:23:35 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709652216; cv=none; b=Fu/QlWMrYPF0rcHmOTtRf8kMBTBz70EHaOAD98WEvnGlCiS2LZG3SiWY2V+Qyca2bDYQqtpEAvW0I/T7kLN5BBOO9959KFwB2/NhDdsLTsyGPgSAwFaJJrGmoinoyLps/n06IL20Hzmg+qjwrOzivoDxRHBXywXlbfegXwCoBP4= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1709652216; c=relaxed/simple; bh=7nVpYFxir/53x4SicgSI/QhTWhwrS0QMmdcn5eWqDWI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=G1VqCEzd/rSfVF/tLyxAvr1ppcsfYSanpAzVg+A4VNboGcm6i8HDEJKVbEr3jbMA0XwrUD4PZiiamMmDoWiNEdRzd3hmWIyabLwr95ErQIQ3f6XP3Pu6/yLz0nwPsAyq5rkJU+GjKVp5PSLUQYDSNsSEvl6nimvvM+UiJBdtoHo= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=p/xg4Rn/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="p/xg4Rn/" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 671CDC433C7; Tue, 5 Mar 2024 15:23:35 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1709652215; bh=7nVpYFxir/53x4SicgSI/QhTWhwrS0QMmdcn5eWqDWI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=p/xg4Rn/m5Ci5Z9bt59m1Ze+/TGJqbGeOywzUo0/ASbkSpMYUGx62oaKXZWRvUGaK W0pKMHwtKZpT4zer4Dpv8BLtKd4U0fBRZ7DSULE4yBEX67YUcXGzOixxWqoPKPpq97 4XlJmMzbAEtXnZ1+RiBCc4wfSfwNurI6Xd4WvuHzb7c9rs4p/YS0L6RmEugLyNHuLL E2J+geCERv5j09Q08PKJDaGpzGCHMr6+ZEuIFCo1l/Kc+YSAkheomPCrwCtoaBYbxl SDBqwYP74NRFNVN9Ul3rMczFDUlwX+ld1L89jwNYy9euhTCZm9Vpls4ZMltBFrRUro W/2XngkLLC6EQ== Date: Tue, 5 Mar 2024 07:23:34 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior Cc: Paolo Abeni , netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jesper Dangaard Brouer , Thomas Gleixner , Wander Lairson Costa , Yan Zhai Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 2/4] net: Allow to use SMP threads for backlog NAPI. Message-ID: <20240305072334.59819960@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20240305103530.FEVh-64E@linutronix.de> References: <20240228121000.526645-1-bigeasy@linutronix.de> <20240228121000.526645-3-bigeasy@linutronix.de> <20240305103530.FEVh-64E@linutronix.de> 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-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 5 Mar 2024 11:35:30 +0100 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote: > I had RH benchmarking this and based on their 25Gbe and 50Gbe NICs and > the results look good. If anything it looked a bit better with this on > the 50Gbe NICs but since those NICs have RSS=E2=80=A6 TBH if y'all tested this with iperf that's pretty meaningless. The concern is not as much throughput on an idle system as it=20 is the fact that we involve scheduler with it's heuristics for every NAPI run. But I recognize that your access to production workloads may=20 be limited and you did more than most, so =F0=9F=A4=B7=EF=B8=8F