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
next prev parent 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).