[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1229022734.3266.67.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Thu, 11 Dec 2008 13:12:14 -0600
From: James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>
To: Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@...b.net>
Cc: Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>,
Mike Christie <michaelc@...wisc.edu>,
Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@...asas.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, scst-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
Bart Van Assche <bart.vanassche@...il.com>,
"Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC 23/23]: Support for zero-copy TCP transmit of user
space data
On Thu, 2008-12-11 at 21:16 +0300, Vladislav Bolkhovitin wrote:
> Hi Evgeniy,
>
> Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> > Hi Vladislav.
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 10, 2008 at 10:04:36PM +0300, Vladislav Bolkhovitin (vst@...b.net) wrote:
> >> In the chosen approach new optional field void *net_priv was added to
> >> struct page. It is enclosed by
> >
> > There is a huge no-no in networking land on increasing skb.
> > Reason is simple every skb will carry potentially unneded data as long
> > as given option is enabled, and most of the time it will.
> > To break this barrier one has to have (I wanted to write ego, but then
> > decided to replace it with mojo) so huge reason to do this, that it is
> > almost impossible to have.
> >
> > Something tells me that increasing page structure with 8 bytes because
> > of zero-copy iscsi transfer is not that great idea, since basically every
> > user out there will have it enabled in the distro config and will waste
> > noticeble amount of ram.
>
> The waste will be only 0.2% of RAM or 2MB per 1GB. Not much. Perhaps,
> not noticeable for an average user of distro kernels at all. Embedded
> people, who count each byte, almost always don't need iSCSI, so won't
> have any problems to disable
> TCP_ZERO_COPY_TRANSFER_COMPLETION_NOTIFICATION option.
Actually, there are several other considerations:
1. struct page is a lowmem structure, so increasing its size
becomes problematic on x86 PAE systems.
2. The current 64 bit struct page seems to be exactly pushing a
cacheline boundary. Increasing it so it spills over will have a
performance impact
It's the performance problems that will be most critical, I suspect, so
you'll need mm people buy in for doing this.
One thing that leaps immediately to mind is that you could isolate this
to the net layer by putting it in skb_frag_struct. However, such a move
would require a proper API for this in net ... right now it looks like
you're using the struct page addition to carry this information from
SCSI to net, which is a bit of a layering violation.
James
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists