[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b11886d2-d2de-35be-fab3-d1c65252a9a8@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2021 15:07:32 +0100
From: Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@...il.com>
To: Íñigo Huguet <ihuguet@...hat.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, ivan@...udflare.com,
ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, hawk@...nel.org,
john.fastabend@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] sfc: revert "reduce the number of requested xdp ev
queues"
On 08/07/2021 13:14, Íñigo Huguet wrote:
> In my opinion, there is no reason to make that distinction between
> normal traffic and XDP traffic.
> [...]
> If the user wants to prevent XDP from mixing with normal traffic, just
> not attaching an XDP program to the interface, or not using
> XDP_TX/REDIRECT in it would be enough. Probably I don't understand
> what you want to say here.
I think it's less about that and more about avoiding lock contention.
If two sources (XDP and the regular stack) are both trying to use a TXQ,
and contending for a lock, it's possible that the resulting total
throughput could be far less than either source alone would get if it
had exclusive use of a queue.
There don't really seem to be any good answers to this; any CPU in the
system can initiate an XDP_REDIRECT at any time and if they can't each
get a queue to themselves then I don't see how the arbitration can be
performant. (There is the middle-ground possibility of TXQs shared by
multiple XDP CPUs but not shared with the regular stack, in which case
if only a subset of CPUs are actually handling RX on the device(s) with
an XDP_REDIRECTing program it may be possible to avoid contention if
the core-to-XDP-TXQ mapping can be carefully configured.)
-ed
Powered by blists - more mailing lists