netdev.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@redhat.com>
To: Toshiaki Makita <makita.toshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@netronome.com>,
	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@kernel.org>,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, xdp-newbies@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] veth: Support bulk XDP_TX
Date: Thu, 23 May 2019 14:18:25 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87sgt51i0e.fsf@toke.dk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <599302b2-96d2-b571-01ee-f4914acaf765@lab.ntt.co.jp>

Toshiaki Makita <makita.toshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp> writes:

> On 2019/05/23 20:25, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
>> Toshiaki Makita <makita.toshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp> writes:
>> 
>>> This improves XDP_TX performance by about 8%.
>>>
>>> Here are single core XDP_TX test results. CPU consumptions are taken
>>> from "perf report --no-child".
>>>
>>> - Before:
>>>
>>>   7.26 Mpps
>>>
>>>   _raw_spin_lock  7.83%
>>>   veth_xdp_xmit  12.23%
>>>
>>> - After:
>>>
>>>   7.84 Mpps
>>>
>>>   _raw_spin_lock  1.17%
>>>   veth_xdp_xmit   6.45%
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Toshiaki Makita <makita.toshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp>
>>> ---
>>>  drivers/net/veth.c | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>>>  1 file changed, 25 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/veth.c b/drivers/net/veth.c
>>> index 52110e5..4edc75f 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/veth.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/veth.c
>>> @@ -442,6 +442,23 @@ static int veth_xdp_xmit(struct net_device *dev, int n,
>>>  	return ret;
>>>  }
>>>  
>>> +static void veth_xdp_flush_bq(struct net_device *dev)
>>> +{
>>> +	struct xdp_tx_bulk_queue *bq = this_cpu_ptr(&xdp_tx_bq);
>>> +	int sent, i, err = 0;
>>> +
>>> +	sent = veth_xdp_xmit(dev, bq->count, bq->q, 0);
>> 
>> Wait, veth_xdp_xmit() is just putting frames on a pointer ring. So
>> you're introducing an additional per-cpu bulk queue, only to avoid lock
>> contention around the existing pointer ring. But the pointer ring is
>> per-rq, so if you have lock contention, this means you must have
>> multiple CPUs servicing the same rq, no?
>
> Yes, it's possible. Not recommended though.
>
>> So why not just fix that instead?
>
> The queues are shared with packets from stack sent from peer. That's
> because I needed the lock. I have tried to separate the queues, one for
> redirect and one for stack, but receiver side got too complicated and it
> ended up with worse performance.

I meant fix it with configuration. Now many receive queues are you
running on the veth device in your benchmarks, and how have you
configured the RPS?

-Toke

  reply	other threads:[~2019-05-23 12:18 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-05-23 10:56 [PATCH bpf-next 0/3] veth: Bulk XDP_TX Toshiaki Makita
2019-05-23 10:56 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/3] xdp: Add bulk XDP_TX queue Toshiaki Makita
2019-05-23 11:11   ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-05-23 11:24     ` Toshiaki Makita
2019-05-23 11:33       ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-05-23 10:56 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/3] xdp: Add tracepoint for bulk XDP_TX Toshiaki Makita
2019-05-23 13:12   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2019-05-24  1:33     ` Toshiaki Makita
2019-05-23 10:56 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/3] veth: Support " Toshiaki Makita
2019-05-23 11:25   ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-05-23 11:35     ` Toshiaki Makita
2019-05-23 12:18       ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen [this message]
2019-05-23 13:40         ` Toshiaki Makita
2019-05-23 13:29       ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2019-05-23 13:51         ` Toshiaki Makita
2019-05-24  3:13           ` Jason Wang
2019-05-24  3:28             ` Toshiaki Makita
2019-05-24  3:54               ` Jason Wang
2019-05-24  4:52                 ` Toshiaki Makita
2019-05-24  9:53           ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2019-05-27  6:08             ` Toshiaki Makita

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=87sgt51i0e.fsf@toke.dk \
    --to=toke@redhat.com \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=hawk@kernel.org \
    --cc=jakub.kicinski@netronome.com \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=makita.toshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=xdp-newbies@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).