netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] udp: implement and use per cpu rx skbs cache

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, 19 Apr 2018 09:40:37 +0200
From:   Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To:     Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] udp: implement and use per cpu rx skbs
 cache

Hi,

On Wed, 2018-04-18 at 12:21 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> 
> On 04/18/2018 10:15 AM, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> is not appealing to me :/
> > 
> > Thank you for the feedback.
> > Sorry for not being clear about it, but knotd is using SO_REUSEPORT and
> > the above tests are leveraging it.
> > 
> > That 5% is on top of that 300%.
> 
> Then there is something wrong.
> 
> Adding copies should not increase performance.

The skb and data are copied into the UDP skb cache only if the socket
is under memory pressure, and that happens if and only if the receiver
is slower than the BH/IP receive path.

The copy slows down the RX path - which was dropping packets - and
makes the udp_recvmsg() considerably faster, as consuming skb becomes
almost a no-op.

AFAICS, this is similar to the strategy you used in:

ommit c8c8b127091b758f5768f906bcdeeb88bc9951ca
Author: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Date:   Wed Dec 7 09:19:33 2016 -0800

    udp: under rx pressure, try to condense skbs

with the difference that with the UDP skb cache there is an hard limit
to the amount of memory the BH is allowed to copy.

> If it does, there is certainly another way, reaching 10% instead of 5%

I benchmarked vs a DNS server to test and verify that we get measurable
benefits in real life scenario. The measured performance gain for the
RX path with reasonable configurations is ~20%.

Any suggestions for better results are more than welcome!

Cheers,

Paolo