From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25BB7C433FE for ; Sat, 15 Oct 2022 19:50:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229681AbiJOTuG (ORCPT ); Sat, 15 Oct 2022 15:50:06 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38004 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229663AbiJOTuE (ORCPT ); Sat, 15 Oct 2022 15:50:04 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-x734.google.com (mail-qk1-x734.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::734]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A8DCE2649A; Sat, 15 Oct 2022 12:50:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk1-x734.google.com with SMTP id z30so4522635qkz.13; Sat, 15 Oct 2022 12:50:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=6oLVdw0cZuqaOKT9ROptKn3b8uDN0aCnLROazMdgeqk=; b=IO8WJ3hL5rwlhfbeUVUH8LrBsTDdTLyDy0tbu+HxxYzzKbU6/o7MukfZBWR0sztSP2 H8myo6VAwPy5/zjB89Oq4p3oFHZKf+k/Fre09M6Zbnr25hz7BTtM825B/OAZJISKyGqz OvrWFaHBZmy8r34Ctve6/4mm6EV+2+2f64TETcoujZ/EkbLGxYFlDzpQEgdn5bx89351 w5p60sX/z9TtaKq1x/o3RvIBaZYl9GuiV0Tpgu6BfTbPxekuzW5Kn4AOGtf7/XQ0HVDb fds/gbOHOXqEMtApIUz8AAV/R7IwqijrBPBH3h+zK1WOMWz4cLOE80nxV3KZWDUZAGdb npzA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=6oLVdw0cZuqaOKT9ROptKn3b8uDN0aCnLROazMdgeqk=; b=K/PgTM6KwNAmb0jZIFz5EZlVmrRaxw8w6Pk1CMK3pRJDm0NL+siegECka3xXNBMQ0g EplumX0OXj7tll1VU7NzxtP5DjvIYOuE/u/ZDmsV8J8HS/Ve7i4H/PDeFbXV15noVngq FDBL0stTDSm4/DLfPcf+kL3LRqvbbX57JCf7P6ROrLcoU3XkatuRuU1sYkhnXlfAAYEf 8X7xmxII3gpqgg3+ZLFqsvTlGvNIBA7P1ui2yKN6XsK7sR8qt+LAxkfFrEsSxGaYQVeB Y+AWBE79KCrZqN2GW9sNs4ke4yR9nWu9ALRJhonDpuKLvor3FPpnChQ/u5M8Osii83tg VJ9g== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf0amW8L78gfMniWid84oj7krf/l2NyKU9FtbvqYm11ThsEibG3C mSoQ3neVm1TPT+pOODtuYt0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM4WwiQfxwMrAO85WbcfHaH/QaOsu71JLPtcGxIY6207P2zl2kaMFx3KXXR9kW58X0SS0BrtGw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:1519:b0:6ee:af9e:9048 with SMTP id i25-20020a05620a151900b006eeaf9e9048mr2825542qkk.601.1665863401804; Sat, 15 Oct 2022 12:50:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2600:1700:65a0:ab60:b8b9:b1cd:e6fc:2d50]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a20-20020a05622a065400b0039853b7b771sm4707455qtb.80.2022.10.15.12.50.00 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Sat, 15 Oct 2022 12:50:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2022 12:49:59 -0700 From: Cong Wang To: Bobby Eshleman Cc: Stefano Garzarella , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Bobby Eshleman , Bobby Eshleman , Cong Wang , Jiang Wang , Stefan Hajnoczi , Jason Wang , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , kvm@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] vsock: replace virtio_vsock_pkt with sk_buff Message-ID: References: <20221006011946.85130-1-bobby.eshleman@bytedance.com> <20221006025956-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20221006073410.ahhqhlhah4lo47o7@sgarzare-redhat> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Oct 03, 2022 at 12:11:39AM +0000, Bobby Eshleman wrote: > On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 09:34:10AM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 03:08:12AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 05, 2022 at 06:19:44PM -0700, Bobby Eshleman wrote: > > > > This patch replaces the struct virtio_vsock_pkt with struct sk_buff. > > > > > > > > Using sk_buff in vsock benefits it by a) allowing vsock to be extended > > > > for socket-related features like sockmap, b) vsock may in the future > > > > use other sk_buff-dependent kernel capabilities, and c) vsock shares > > > > commonality with other socket types. > > > > > > > > This patch is taken from the original series found here: > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1660362668.git.bobby.eshleman@bytedance.com/ > > > > > > > > Small-sized packet throughput improved by ~5% (from 18.53 Mb/s to 19.51 > > > > Mb/s). Tested using uperf, 16B payloads, 64 threads, 100s, averaged from > > > > 10 test runs (n=10). This improvement is likely due to packet merging. > > > > > > > > Large-sized packet throughput decreases ~9% (from 27.25 Gb/s to 25.04 > > > > Gb/s). Tested using uperf, 64KB payloads, 64 threads, 100s, averaged > > > > from 10 test runs (n=10). > > > > > > > > Medium-sized packet throughput decreases ~5% (from 4.0 Gb/s to 3.81 > > > > Gb/s). Tested using uperf, 4k to 8k payload sizes picked randomly > > > > according to normal distribution, 64 threads, 100s, averaged from 10 > > > > test runs (n=10). > > > > > > It is surprizing to me that the original vsock code managed to outperform > > > the new one, given that to my knowledge we did not focus on optimizing it. > > > > Yeah mee to. > > > > Indeed. > > > From this numbers maybe the allocation cost has been reduced as it performs > > better with small packets. But with medium to large packets we perform > > worse, perhaps because previously we were allocating a contiguous buffer up > > to 64k? > > Instead alloc_skb() could allocate non-contiguous pages ? (which would solve > > the problems we saw a few days ago) > > > > I think this would be the case with alloc_skb_with_frags(), but > internally alloc_skb() uses kmalloc() for the payload and sk_buff_head > slab allocations for the sk_buff itself (all the more confusing to me, > as the prior allocator also uses two separate allocations per packet). I think it is related to your implementation of virtio_transport_add_to_queue(), where you introduced much more complicated logic than before: - spin_lock_bh(&vsock->send_pkt_list_lock); - list_add_tail(&pkt->list, &vsock->send_pkt_list); - spin_unlock_bh(&vsock->send_pkt_list_lock); - + virtio_transport_add_to_queue(&vsock->send_pkt_queue, skb); A simple list_add_tail() is definitely faster than your virtio_transport_skbs_can_merge() check. So, why do you have to merge skb while we don't merge virtio_vsock_pkt? _If_ you are trying to mimic TCP, I think you are doing it wrong, it can be much more efficient if you could do the merge in sendmsg() before skb is even allocated, see tcp_sendmsg_locked(). Thanks.