From: "Rafał Miłecki" <zajec5@gmail.com>
To: Toshiaki Makita <makita.toshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp>,
Felix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>
Cc: Toshiaki Makita <toshiaki.makita1@gmail.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Stefano Brivio <sbrivio@redhat.com>,
Sabrina Dubroca <sd@queasysnail.net>,
David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>, Jo-Philipp Wich <jo@mein.io>,
Koen Vandeputte <koen.vandeputte@ncentric.com>
Subject: Re: NAT performance regression caused by vlan GRO support
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2019 10:24:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <f23dd3f7-691a-6f9b-fca0-7a78f44fcb97@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <31acd23f-6973-1912-7fcc-575a5d4e00e7@gmail.com>
On 05.04.2019 10:12, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> On 05.04.2019 09:58, Toshiaki Makita wrote:
>> On 2019/04/05 16:14, Felix Fietkau wrote:
>>> On 2019-04-05 09:11, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
>>>> I guess its GRO + csum_partial() to be blamed for this performance drop.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe csum_partial() is very fast on your powerful machine and few extra calls
>>>> don't make a difference? I can imagine it affecting much slower home router with
>>>> ARM cores.
>>> Most high performance Ethernet devices implement hardware checksum
>>> offload, which completely gets rid of this overhead.
>>> Unfortunately, the BCM53xx/47xx Ethernet MAC doesn't have this, which is
>>> why you're getting such crappy performance.
>>
>> Hmm... now I disabled rx checksum and tried the test again, and indeed I
>> see csum_partial from GRO path. But I also see csum_partial even without
>> GRO from nf_conntrack_in -> tcp_packet -> __skb_checksum_complete.
>> Probably Rafał disabled nf_conntrack_checksum sysctl knob?
>>
>> But anyway even with disabling rx csum offload my machine has better
>> performance with GRO. I'm sure in some cases GRO should be disabled, but
>> I guess it's difficult to determine whether we should disable GRO or not
>> automatically when csum offload is not available.
>
> Few testing results:
>
> 1) ethtool -K eth0 gro off; echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_checksum
> [ 6] 0.0-60.0 sec 6.57 GBytes 940 Mbits/sec
>
> 2) ethtool -K eth0 gro off; echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_checksum
> [ 6] 0.0-60.0 sec 4.65 GBytes 666 Mbits/sec
For this case (GRO off and nf_conntrack_checksum enabled) I can confirm I see
csum_partial() in the perf output. It's taking 13,14% instead of 25,46% (as when
using GRO) though.
Samples: 38K of event 'cycles', Event count (approx.): 12209908413
Overhead Command Shared Object Symbol
+ 13,14% ksoftirqd/1 [kernel.kallsyms] [k] csum_partial
+ 10,16% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] v7_dma_inv_range
+ 6,36% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] l2c210_inv_range
+ 4,89% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __irqentry_text_end
+ 4,12% ksoftirqd/1 [kernel.kallsyms] [k] v7_dma_clean_range
+ 3,78% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] bcma_host_soc_read32
+ 2,76% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] arch_cpu_idle
+ 2,45% ksoftirqd/1 [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __netif_receive_skb_core
+ 2,37% ksoftirqd/1 [kernel.kallsyms] [k] l2c210_clean_range
+ 1,76% ksoftirqd/1 [kernel.kallsyms] [k] bgmac_start_xmit
+ 1,66% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] bgmac_poll
+ 1,55% ksoftirqd/1 [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __dev_queue_xmit
+ 1,11% ksoftirqd/1 [kernel.kallsyms] [k] skb_vlan_untag
> 3) ethtool -K eth0 gro on; echo 0 > /proc/sys/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_checksum
> [ 6] 0.0-60.0 sec 4.02 GBytes 575 Mbits/sec
>
> 4) ethtool -K eth0 gro on; echo 1 > /proc/sys/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_checksum
> [ 6] 0.0-60.0 sec 4.04 GBytes 579 Mbits/sec
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-04-05 8:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-04-04 12:57 NAT performance regression caused by vlan GRO support Rafał Miłecki
2019-04-04 15:17 ` Toshiaki Makita
2019-04-04 20:22 ` Rafał Miłecki
2019-04-05 4:26 ` Toshiaki Makita
2019-04-05 5:48 ` Rafał Miłecki
2019-04-05 7:11 ` Rafał Miłecki
2019-04-05 7:14 ` Felix Fietkau
2019-04-05 7:58 ` Toshiaki Makita
2019-04-05 8:12 ` Rafał Miłecki
2019-04-05 8:24 ` Rafał Miłecki [this message]
2019-04-05 10:18 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-04-05 10:51 ` Florian Westphal
2019-04-05 11:00 ` Eric Dumazet
2019-04-07 11:53 ` Rafał Miłecki
2019-04-07 11:54 ` Rafał Miłecki
2019-04-08 13:31 ` David Laight
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=f23dd3f7-691a-6f9b-fca0-7a78f44fcb97@gmail.com \
--to=zajec5@gmail.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=jo@mein.io \
--cc=koen.vandeputte@ncentric.com \
--cc=makita.toshiaki@lab.ntt.co.jp \
--cc=nbd@nbd.name \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sbrivio@redhat.com \
--cc=sd@queasysnail.net \
--cc=toshiaki.makita1@gmail.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).