From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-il1-f174.google.com (mail-il1-f174.google.com [209.85.166.174]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E43581411DE; Tue, 26 Aug 2025 01:49:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.166.174 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756172990; cv=none; b=cAy9YdqUVBhtqtdz0tErQM5ZU6pMW0cjnjH6+YYLc6xrUJ1E4un9myPXY+mmuNVYoMPq29fw+7i+vjrj6PH9FDo+p+hIX/Vqplh8/5sYNG7v1OsMRfMmTIR7nOCV+rpy/2eViUiVVEFEYij5gI1NbKBmTajBjnU5KKn91Kbi/zM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1756172990; c=relaxed/simple; bh=60DrGJbOHI5Jr6uXidnxi18fJWHYrWJJvL2z+wGxVE0=; h=MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=GHbACCs1+aJECo74j2t87qHYSGhmy5CAFuKGZX/nub5VseUa3Sqy6Ahn8TuICsJjBaMQ1Dcc7UIW2epjXrmLFRY6v0lI+ejhD63PuhULfskzKMJp8OjrIy+xnKYdoCmHYHgVCt4LrLZ21o9TmUetHjmAq2CP13kwcuXcx3uPwWk= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b=X5sskZU9; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.166.174 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="X5sskZU9" Received: by mail-il1-f174.google.com with SMTP id e9e14a558f8ab-3e974105ab8so11776165ab.1; Mon, 25 Aug 2025 18:49:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1756172988; x=1756777788; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=60DrGJbOHI5Jr6uXidnxi18fJWHYrWJJvL2z+wGxVE0=; b=X5sskZU97d9IMiGd5KNqTt4VJBw0yimj1GfK7w22y1d00MRQ3W0B/FQ+j/Bi4MgZHF WR57ZJ8sNF14YD2tc+NqtSvBHrE4lqgRL4juFQOc72OpEzeoOa+Ytg5/N07+jlW0G/Ak z0B/T9f+Q8xRCIRsHgQi3H0jKR9G2S3mQttQxgwmsEZGVW4jgUM3rDqJ8yqceH1Ii48g 7XZ3UEKvAFXZZ5PvVFOvW/2ATWBkrGN9GGOQYuLzF5eUHqMNG0NHJkT5sVbeX55GBqub VFO7sNwt9qVy9nEpD1ma0vSKSAmNCb8LP5DVd2CisnWdUA1+OiYKuyjL5lwhh72CKFqf N3Qg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1756172988; x=1756777788; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=60DrGJbOHI5Jr6uXidnxi18fJWHYrWJJvL2z+wGxVE0=; b=ILOufrirqkqR9iUa7LfWXN+ru3B9MIqJU/LsTEdZ6qH7I+OaNiAv+zMbg9aM9zGAAx ghBLCW30Qa8QsFrGObWi9sftOZsnDu4fGvzGLNycE/JyQ32BWjW4SZSt8PPOqfc+jcax wdXoUzK9zcuqVq3XDD1g/CfnEYo25JGcdTKezUvgS1G1mAJ9xfV8OQtIgOW6LiD0xCdP uSdJzgCcjxy9av/jO3BsrZgQhqakg45p8iljNJRkGeP/3I36A/eOUzkRNpblre/HSBW3 iEppc751kHwLDsV8fPbEPDstFffSKPKsCYXV8weL1tMCoIlIdQxYa80YKF1BrJGgHg4p RWuA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCW0fPjetkx5lD39KksHaEmU5cxMy2UtOSkeD0HUatWrZP/aXN0bRB4tsG9opNQoYeJnEttfrUfw@vger.kernel.org, AJvYcCXeZPrIy6wtfwvgy9RAvyYtVw0T6dy/dOEbsTVF7/6sDIJWoPPcrHTZ43yC6hwlqB8msE0=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yykh86EHcAk1Fhmf7V1iBEkcX7OBAC1lzgArTmSajqxPC9dhVF9 arJFmvQD4t+wwW77nPuTBKYs8hN3BMcSB8ZxoQ7Nwv2AmgkE40Lbu4mKs/zxMHVySBCrX54M4kF L5cM4mf7SY0GzgtID4p8VWZhg0z1De8c= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGncuOlN7V/r9Ama06gToJEnl4d2eUgRhcv+qDLrJ7fbMUK7Yc687tuUiMWF+iZQu nTwpqxSlN31jvMTNUrV3MF2SVtn2w5jR027MAKddMC6oaBSU7SZToj4ypjs7MnlaJmBpSNxveeO JMaFszfuCnQYdTtrBI1drYppiVQTo3uOA85RxNTKLr7fX9BYYoKH3qIRbCOtiSHJwQSbTI6wKIz wi3xFABRZ6EUMaN X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG1BRpj8TLZDLFlkJC/FniHBzl+imsyU49RHJVLmxOacukTa4TB6th4wqVm+lNLzUbZqXRIrx6hGTZ4U3TF3+Y= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:480a:b0:3e9:4547:5e03 with SMTP id e9e14a558f8ab-3e945479d7dmr165187995ab.10.1756172987986; Mon, 25 Aug 2025 18:49:47 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20250825135342.53110-1-kerneljasonxing@gmail.com> <20250825104437.5349512c@kernel.org> <20250825172928.234fd75c@kernel.org> <20250825181532.1b6ae14f@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20250825181532.1b6ae14f@kernel.org> From: Jason Xing Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2025 09:49:11 +0800 X-Gm-Features: Ac12FXxcw-uBeivFSh7mXfNJhBEVgGd8sQbIq7FbQcH-g-dKOLiDMYFgkuS9Es8 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 0/9] xsk: improvement performance in copy mode To: Jakub Kicinski Cc: davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, pabeni@redhat.com, bjorn@kernel.org, magnus.karlsson@intel.com, maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com, jonathan.lemon@gmail.com, sdf@fomichev.me, ast@kernel.org, daniel@iogearbox.net, hawk@kernel.org, john.fastabend@gmail.com, horms@kernel.org, andrew+netdev@lunn.ch, bpf@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jason Xing Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Aug 26, 2025 at 9:15=E2=80=AFAM Jakub Kicinski wr= ote: > > On Tue, 26 Aug 2025 08:51:24 +0800 Jason Xing wrote: > > > > Sorry for missing the question. I'm not very familiar with how to r= un the > > > > test based on AF_PACKET. Could you point it out for me? Thanks. > > > > > > > > I remember the very initial version of AF_XDP was pure AF_PACKET. S= o > > > > may I ask why we expect to see the comparison between them? > > > > > > Pretty sure I told you this at least twice but the point of AF_XDP > > > is the ZC mode. Without a comparison to AF_PACKET which has similar > > > functionality optimizing AF_XDP copy mode seems unjustified. > > > > Oh, I see. Let me confirm again that you expect to see a demo like the > > copy mode of AF_PACKET v4 [1] and see the differences in performance, > > right? > > > > If AF_PACKET eventually outperforms AF_XDP, do we need to reinvent the > > copy mode based on AF_PACKET? > > > > And if a quick/simple implementation is based on AF_PACKET, it > > shouldn't be that easy to use the same benchmark to see which one is > > better. That means inventing a new unified benchmark tool is > > necessary? > > To be honest I suspect you can get an LLM to convert your AF_XDP test > to use AF_PACKET.. Okay, allow me to spend more time on af_packet before getting my hands dirty... Converting xdpsock should not be that easy, I feel... But I will give it a try first. Thanks, Jason