From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
To: Tom Herbert <therbert@google.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
Linux Netdev List <netdev@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 1/1] rps: core implementation
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2010 06:54:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B44258C.2050302@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <65634d661001051732qd64e79dt37e6247f8b0dc863@mail.gmail.com>
Le 06/01/2010 02:32, Tom Herbert a écrit :
> Here's an RPS updated patch with some minor fixes, sorry for the long
> turnaround. This addresses most of the comments for last patch:
>
> - Moved shared fields in softnet_data into a separate cacheline
> - Make hashrnd __read_mostly
> - Removed extra "hash" variable in get_rps_cpu
> - Allow use of RPS from netif_rx (we have a use case where this is needed)
> - In net_rps_action clear each cpu in the mask before calling the
> function, I believe this prevents race condition
Hmm, I cant see a race condition here, could you elaborate on this ?
mask is local to this cpu, and we cannot re-enter a function that could
change some bits under us (we are called from net_rx_action())
If you believe there is a race condition, I suspect race is still there.
>
> I still don't have a better way to do a per-napi RPS mask than using a
> single variable in sysfs under the device. It still seems like we'd
> want a file or even directory for each napi instance, but that looks
> like some major changes.
>
> Also, we found that a few drivers are calling napi_gro_receive in lieu
> of netif_receive_skb (tg3, e1000e for example). The patch does not
> support that, so there is no benefit for them with RPS :-(. The GRO
> path looks pretty intertwined with the receive although way through
> TCP so I'm not sure it will be easy to retrofit. We changed e1000e to
> call netif_receive_skb and top netperf RR throughput went for 85K tps
> to 241K tps, and for our workloads at least this is may be the bigger
> win.
Did you tested with VLANS too ? (with/without hardware support)
>
> Tom
Excellent, but I suspect big win comes from using few NICS.
(number_of(NICS) < num_online_cpus)
(in the reverse case, possible contention on queue->csd)
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> index 97873e3..7107b13 100644
> --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
> +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> @@ -676,6 +676,29 @@ struct net_device_ops {
> };
>
> /*
> + * Structure for Receive Packet Steering. Length of map and array of CPU ID's.
> + */
> +struct rps_map {
> + int len;
> + u16 map[0];
> +};
> +
> +/*
> + * Structure that contains the rps maps for various NAPI instances of a device.
> + */
> +struct dev_rps_maps {
> + int num_maps;
> + struct rcu_head rcu;
> + struct rps_map maps[0];
> +};
I feel uneasy about this, because of kmalloc() max size and rounding to power of two effects.
It also uses a single node in NUMA setups.
> +
> +/* Bound number of CPUs that can be in an rps map */
> +#define MAX_RPS_CPUS (num_possible_cpus() < 256 ? num_possible_cpus() : 256)
> +
> +/* Maximum size of RPS map (for allocation) */
> +#define RPS_MAP_SIZE (sizeof(struct rps_map) + (MAX_RPS_CPUS * sizeof(u16)))
> +
> +/*
> * The DEVICE structure.
> * Actually, this whole structure is a big mistake. It mixes I/O
> * data with strictly "high-level" data, and it has to know about
> @@ -861,6 +884,9 @@ struct net_device {
>
> struct netdev_queue rx_queue;
>
> + struct dev_rps_maps *dev_rps_maps; /* Per-NAPI maps for
> + receive packet steeing */
> +
If you store rps_map pointer into napi itself, you could avoid this MAX_RPS_CPUS thing
and really dynamically allocate the structure with the number of online cpus mentioned
in the map.
But yes, it makes store_rps_cpus() more complex :(
This probably can be done later, this Version 4 of RPS looks very good, thanks !
I am going to test it today on my dev machine before giving an Acked-by :)
Reviewed-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-01-06 5:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-20 23:28 [PATCH v4 1/1] rps: core implementation Tom Herbert
2009-11-20 23:39 ` David Miller
2009-11-20 23:50 ` Tom Herbert
2009-11-21 0:05 ` David Miller
2009-11-21 0:12 ` Tom Herbert
2009-11-21 0:40 ` Jarek Poplawski
2009-11-20 23:40 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-11-20 23:53 ` Tom Herbert
2009-11-20 23:56 ` David Miller
2009-12-17 21:04 ` Tom Herbert
2010-01-06 1:32 ` Tom Herbert
2010-01-06 5:54 ` Eric Dumazet [this message]
2010-01-06 7:56 ` Tom Herbert
2010-01-06 18:38 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-01-06 21:10 ` [BUG net-next-2.6] Had to revert bonding: allow arp_ip_targets on separate vlans to use arp validation Eric Dumazet
2010-01-06 21:28 ` Jay Vosburgh
2010-01-06 21:34 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-01-06 21:38 ` David Miller
2010-01-06 21:45 ` Andy Gospodarek
2010-01-06 22:56 ` [PATCH net-next-2.6] fix " Andy Gospodarek
2010-01-06 23:53 ` Jay Vosburgh
2010-01-07 8:37 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-01-07 8:41 ` David Miller
2010-01-06 22:54 ` [PATCH v4 1/1] rps: core implementation Tom Herbert
2010-01-07 9:15 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-01-07 17:42 ` rps: some comments Eric Dumazet
2010-01-08 0:07 ` Tom Herbert
2010-01-08 6:27 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-01-11 6:25 ` [PATCH v4 1/1] rps: core implementation Tom Herbert
2010-01-11 9:00 ` Eric Dumazet
2010-01-14 4:40 ` David Miller
2009-11-20 23:42 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-11-21 0:04 ` Tom Herbert
2009-11-21 8:07 ` Eric Dumazet
2009-11-21 9:03 ` Tom Herbert
2009-11-21 9:31 ` Eric Dumazet
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=4B44258C.2050302@gmail.com \
--to=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=therbert@google.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).