netdev - Re: Bypass at packet-page level (Was: Optimizing instruction-cache, more packets at each stage)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 28 Jan 2016 18:04:38 +0100
From:	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
To:	Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Or Gerlitz <gerlitz.or@...il.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>,
	Daniel Borkmann <borkmann@...earbox.net>,
	Marek Majkowski <marek@...udflare.com>,
	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
	Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>,
	Amir Vadai <amirva@...il.com>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	Vladislav Yasevich <vyasevich@...il.com>, brouer@...hat.com
Subject: Re: Bypass at packet-page level (Was: Optimizing instruction-cache,
 more packets at each stage)

On Thu, 28 Jan 2016 08:37:07 -0800
Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 4:45 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 2016-01-28 at 10:25 +0100, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> >  
> >> Yes, that is exactly what I'm contemplating :-)  That is idea "(1)".
> >>
> >> A natural extension to this work, which I expect Tom will love, is to
> >> also use the idea for RPS.  Once we have a SKB list in stack/GRO-layer,
> >> then we could build a local sk_buff_head list for each remote CPU, by
> >> calling get_rps_cpu().   And then enqueue_list_to_backlog, by a
> >> skb_queue_splice_tail(&cpu_list, &cpu->sd->input_pkt_queue) call.
> >>
> >> This would amortize the cost of transferring packets to a remote CPU,
> >> which Eric AFAIK points out is costing approx ~133ns.
> >>  
> >
> > Jesper, RPS and RFS already defer sending the IPI and submit batches to
> > remote cpus.
> >
> > See commits
> >
> > e326bed2f47d0365da5a8faaf8ee93ed2d86325b ("rps: immediate send IPI in
> > process_backlog()")
> >
> > 88751275b8e867d756e4f86ae92afe0232de129f ("rps: shortcut
> > net_rps_action()")
> >
> > And of course all the discussions we had to come up with
> > 0a9627f2649a02bea165cfd529d7bcb625c2fcad ("rps: Receive Packet
> > Steering")
> >
> > The current state :
> >
> > net_rps_action_and_irq_enable() sends the IPI at the end of
> > net_rx_action() once all NAPI handlers have been called, and therefore
> > have accumulated packets and cook rps_ipi_list (via calls to
> > rps_ipi_queued() from enqueue_to_backlog())

Yes, thanks for pointing this out. Then we already have amortized the
IPI call. Great.

> > Adding another stage in the pipeline would not help.
> >  
> skbs are enqueued on a CPU queue one at at time through
> enqueue_to_backlog. It would be nice to do that as a batch of skbs.

Yes, this was what I was looking at doing, a bulk enqueue to backlog.
Thus, amortizing the lock.  And if some remote CPU is reading/using
input_pkt_queue, then we don't bounce that cache line.

-- 
Best regards,
  Jesper Dangaard Brouer
  MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
  Author of http://www.iptv-analyzer.org
  LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer