From: Satoshi OSHIMA <satoshi.oshima.fk@hitachi.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, haoki@redhat.com,
???? <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>,
"Yumiko SUGITA" <yumiko.sugita.yf@hitachi.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 2/3] UDP memory usage accounting: accounting unit and variable
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 22:24:43 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46FD009B.1010904@hitachi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <p734pho9nb9.fsf@bingen.suse.de>
Hi,
Thank you for your comment.
Andi Kleen wrote:
> Satoshi OSHIMA <satoshi.oshima.fk@hitachi.com> writes:
>
>> This patch introduces global variable for UDP memory accounting.
>> The unit is page.
>
> The global variable doesn't seem to be very MP scalable, especially
> if you change it for each packet. This will be a very hot cache line,
> in the worst case bouncing around a large machine.
I understand what you pointed out. But I think the accounting
method I'm proposing is very similar to TCP accounting and per
socket accounting.
How do you think of it?
> Possible alternatives:
> - Per CPU variables
I'm afraid that sockets and socket buffers are handled on
various CPUs. I mean that socket creation might be done
on CPU-A but socket receiving might be done on CPU-B.
And per CPU variables must be counted up when socket
cap is checked. I'm afraid that per CPU vaiables are
also costly enough.
> - You only change the global on socket creation time (by pre
allocating a large
> amount) or when the system comes under memory pressure.
> - Batching of the global updates for multiple packets [that's a variant
> of the previous one, might be still too costly though]
>
> Also for such variables it's usually good to cache line pad them on SMP
> to avoid false sharing with something else.
I believe that memory usage accounting should be done accurately.
Currently I couldn't see how can we know the accurate memory
accounting only when the system is under memory pressure.
But I revised the patch to avoid some atomic operations.
If I could find the good way to avoid atomic operation more,
I will add it.
Satoshi Oshima
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-28 13:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-21 12:26 [RFC/PATCH 2/3] UDP memory usage accounting: accounting unit and variable Satoshi OSHIMA
2007-09-21 13:10 ` Andi Kleen
2007-09-27 18:54 ` Hideo AOKI
2007-09-28 13:24 ` Satoshi OSHIMA [this message]
2007-09-29 3:22 ` Herbert Xu
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-09-28 13:40 Satoshi OSHIMA
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=46FD009B.1010904@hitachi.com \
--to=satoshi.oshima.fk@hitachi.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=haoki@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org \
--cc=yumiko.sugita.yf@hitachi.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).