[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <cf07ec76-9d48-4bff-99f6-0842b5127c81@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2024 17:57:59 +0200
From: Wenjia Zhang <wenjia@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Guangguan Wang <guangguan.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>, jaka@...ux.ibm.com,
davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com
Cc: alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com, tonylu@...ux.alibaba.com,
guwen@...ux.alibaba.com, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net/smc: introduce autosplit for smc
On 09.07.24 18:05, Guangguan Wang wrote:
> When sending large size data in TCP, the data will be split into
> several segments(packets) to transfer due to MTU config. And in
> the receive side, application can be woken up to recv data every
> packet arrived, the data transmission and data recv copy are
> pipelined.
>
> But for SMC-R, it will transmit as many data as possible in one
> RDMA WRITE and a CDC msg follows the RDMA WRITE, in the receive
> size, the application only be woken up to recv data when all RDMA
> WRITE data and the followed CDC msg arrived. The data transmission
> and data recv copy are sequential.
>
> This patch introduce autosplit for SMC, which can automatic split
> data into several segments and every segment transmitted by one RDMA
> WRITE when sending large size data in SMC. Because of the split, the
> data transmission and data send copy can be pipelined in the send side,
> and the data transmission and data recv copy can be pipelined in the
> receive side. Thus autosplit helps improving latency performance when
> sending large size data. The autosplit also works for SMC-D.
>
> This patch also introduce a sysctl names autosplit_size for configure
> the max size of the split segment, whose default value is 128KiB
> (128KiB perform best in my environment).
>
> The sockperf benchmark shows 17%-28% latency improvement when msgsize
>> = 256KB for SMC-R, 15%-32% latency improvement when msgsize >= 256KB
> for SMC-D with smc-loopback.
>
> Test command:
> sockperf sr --tcp -m 1048575
> sockperf pp --tcp -i <server ip> -m <msgsize> -t 20
>
> Test config:
> sysctl -w net.smc.wmem=524288
> sysctl -w net.smc.rmem=524288
>
> Test results:
> SMC-R
> msgsize noautosplit autosplit
> 128KB 55.546 us 55.763 us
> 256KB 83.537 us 69.743 us (17% improve)
> 512KB 138.306 us 100.313 us (28% improve)
> 1MB 273.702 us 197.222 us (28% improve)
>
> SMC-D with smc-loopback
> msgsize noautosplit autosplit
> 128KB 14.672 us 14.690 us
> 256KB 28.277 us 23.958 us (15% improve)
> 512KB 63.047 us 45.339 us (28% improve)
> 1MB 129.306 us 87.278 us (32% improve)
>
> Signed-off-by: Guangguan Wang <guangguan.wang@...ux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> Documentation/networking/smc-sysctl.rst | 11 +++++++++++
> include/net/netns/smc.h | 1 +
> net/smc/smc_sysctl.c | 12 ++++++++++++
> net/smc/smc_tx.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++++-
> 4 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
Hi Guangguan,
If I remember correctly, the intention to use one RDMA-write for a
possible large data is to reduce possible many partial stores. Since
many year has gone, I'm not that sure if it would still be an issue. I
need some time to check on it.
BTW, I don't really like the idea to use sysctl to set the
autosplit_size in any value at will. That makes no sense to improve the
performance.
Thanks,
Wenjia
Powered by blists - more mailing lists