netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: Linux Netdev List <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Corey Minyard <minyard@acm.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] skb_free_datagram() doing something expensive ?
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2008 06:05:08 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <49112984.3000808@cosmosbay.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4910D47E.4030004@cosmosbay.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2241 bytes --]

Eric Dumazet a écrit :
> Hi all
> 
> I noticed high contention on udp_memory_allocated on a typical VOIP 
> application.
> 
> (Now that oprofile correctly runs on my machine :) )
> 
> I can see that skb_free_datagram() is :
> 
> void skb_free_datagram(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb)
> {
>        kfree_skb(skb);
>        sk_mem_reclaim(sk);
> }
> 
> So each time an UDP packet is received, we must touch udp_memory_allocated
> 
> Each time application reads a packet, we call sk_mem_reclaim() and touch 
> again udp_memory_allocated.
> 
> Surely this cannot be correct ?
> 
> If this is correct, time is to resurrect a patch to make 
> proto->memory_allocated a percpu_counter
> or something to have a percpu reserve of say 64 or 128 pages to avoid 
> cache line trashing...
> 
> tcp_memory_allocated do not have this problem, since tcp carefully calls 
> sk_mem_reclaim(sk) only on
> selected paths, not on fast path.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 

What we can do is to avoid reclaiming space if forward_alloc is less than a page

We did that in the past, when introducing sk_mem_reclaim_partial() in 
commit 9993e7d313e80bdc005d09c7def91903e0068f07
([TCP]: Do not purge sk_forward_alloc entirely in tcp_delack_timer())

This patch gives a nice speedup on UDP, particularly for multiple
RTP flows, where each flow has a medium trafic (say VOIP trafic)

[PATCH] net: sk_free_datagram() should use sk_mem_reclaim_partial()

I noticed a contention on udp_memory_allocated on regular UDP applications.

While tcp_memory_allocated is seldom used, it appears each incoming UDP frame
is currently touching udp_memory_allocated when queued, and when received by
application.

One possible solution is to use sk_mem_reclaim_partial() instead of
sk_mem_reclaim(), so that we keep a small reserve (less than one page)
of memory for each UDP socket.

We did something very similar on TCP side in commit
9993e7d313e80bdc005d09c7def91903e0068f07
([TCP]: Do not purge sk_forward_alloc entirely in tcp_delack_timer())

A more complex solution would need to convert prot->memory_allocated to
use a percpu_counter with batches of 64 or 128 pages.

Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <dada1@cosmosbay.com>

[-- Attachment #2: udp_mem_reclaim.patch --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 611 bytes --]

diff --git a/net/core/datagram.c b/net/core/datagram.c
index ee63184..5e2ac0c 100644
--- a/net/core/datagram.c
+++ b/net/core/datagram.c
@@ -209,7 +209,7 @@ struct sk_buff *skb_recv_datagram(struct sock *sk, unsigned flags,
 void skb_free_datagram(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	kfree_skb(skb);
-	sk_mem_reclaim(sk);
+	sk_mem_reclaim_partial(sk);
 }
 
 /**
@@ -248,8 +248,7 @@ int skb_kill_datagram(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb, unsigned int flags)
 		spin_unlock_bh(&sk->sk_receive_queue.lock);
 	}
 
-	kfree_skb(skb);
-	sk_mem_reclaim(sk);
+	skb_free_datagram(sk, skb);
 	return err;
 }
 

  parent reply	other threads:[~2008-11-05  5:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-11-04 23:02 [RFC] skb_free_datagram() doing something expensive ? Eric Dumazet
2008-11-04 23:41 ` David Miller
2008-11-05  5:05 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2008-11-05  9:38   ` David Miller

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=49112984.3000808@cosmosbay.com \
    --to=dada1@cosmosbay.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=minyard@acm.org \
    --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).