netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com>
To: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net,
	jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com, edumazet@google.com,
	bhutchings@solarflare.com, therbert@google.com,
	alexander.duyck@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/2] Coalesce MMIO writes for transmits
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 12:01:18 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FFF1EFE.7070002@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120712102331.42a7b041@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net>

On 07/12/2012 10:23 AM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 17:25:58 -0700
> Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@intel.com> wrote:
>
>> This patch set is meant to address recent issues I found with ixgbe
>> performance being bound by Tx tail writes.  With these changes in place
>> and the dispatch_limit set to 1 or more I see a significant increase in
>> performance.
>>
>> In the case of one of my systems I saw the routing rate for 7 queues jump
>> from 10.5 to 11.7Mpps.  The overall increase I have seen on most systems is
>> something on the order of about 15%.  In the case of pktgen I have also
>> seen a noticeable increase as the previous limit for transmits was
>> ~12.5Mpps, but with this patch set in place and the dispatch_limit enabled
>> the value increases to ~14.2Mpps.
>>
>> I expected there to be an increase in latency, however so far I have not
>> ran into that.  I have tried running NPtcp tests for latency and seen no
>> difference in the coalesced and non-coalesced transaction times.  I welcome
>> any suggestions for tests I might run that might expose any latency issues
>> as a result of this patch.
>>
>> ---
>>
>> Alexander Duyck (2):
>>       ixgbe: Add functionality for delaying the MMIO write for Tx
>>       net: Add new network device function to allow for MMIO batching
>>
>>
>>  drivers/net/ethernet/intel/ixgbe/ixgbe_main.c |   22 +++++++-
>>  include/linux/netdevice.h                     |   57 +++++++++++++++++++++
>>  net/core/dev.c                                |   67 +++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>  net/core/net-sysfs.c                          |   36 +++++++++++++
>>  4 files changed, 180 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
> This is a good idea. I was thinking of adding a multi-skb operation
> to netdevice_ops to allow this. Something like ndo_start_xmit_pkts but
> the problem is how to deal with the boundary case where there is only
> a limited number of slots in the ring.  Using a "that's all folks"
> operation seems better.
I had considered a multi-skb operation originally, but the problem was
in my case I would have had to come up with a more complex buffering
mechanism to generate a stream of skbs before handing them off to the
device.  By letting the transmit path proceed normally I shouldn't have
any effect on things like the byte queue limits for the transmit queues
and such.

The wierd bit is how this issue was showing up.  I don't know if you
recall my presentation from plumbers last year, but one of the things I
had brought up was the qdisc spinlock being an issue.  However it was
actually this MMIO write that was causing the problem because it was
posting a write to non-coherent memory and then the spinlock was getting
stalled behind the write and couldn't complete until the write was
completed.  With this change in place and the dispatch_limit set to
something like 31 I see the CPU utilization for spinlocks drop from 15%
(90% sch_direct_xmit / 10% dev_queue_xmit) to 5% (66% sch_direct_xmit /
33% dev_queue_xmit).  Makes me wonder what other hotspots we have in the
drivers  that can be resolved by avoiding MMIO followed by locked
operations.

Thanks,

Alex

      reply	other threads:[~2012-07-12 19:01 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-07-12  0:25 [RFC PATCH 0/2] Coalesce MMIO writes for transmits Alexander Duyck
2012-07-12  0:26 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] net: Add new network device function to allow for MMIO batching Alexander Duyck
2012-07-12  7:14   ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-12 15:39     ` Alexander Duyck
2012-07-13  7:38       ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-13 15:37         ` Alexander Duyck
2012-07-13 15:50         ` Stephen Hemminger
2012-07-13 16:23           ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-13  7:19   ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-13 15:49     ` Alexander Duyck
2012-07-13 16:18       ` Eric Dumazet
2012-07-12  0:26 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] ixgbe: Add functionality for delaying the MMIO write for Tx Alexander Duyck
2012-07-12 17:23 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] Coalesce MMIO writes for transmits Stephen Hemminger
2012-07-12 19:01   ` Alexander Duyck [this message]

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=4FFF1EFE.7070002@intel.com \
    --to=alexander.h.duyck@intel.com \
    --cc=alexander.duyck@gmail.com \
    --cc=bhutchings@solarflare.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=edumazet@google.com \
    --cc=jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=shemminger@vyatta.com \
    --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).