netdev - Re: [PATCH v7] rps: Receive Packet Steering

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]

Message-ID: <1268773227.2932.34.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date:	Tue, 16 Mar 2010 22:00:27 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>
Cc:	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7] rps: Receive Packet Steering

Le mardi 16 mars 2010 à 11:03 -0700, Tom Herbert a écrit :
> Tom Herbert wrote:

> 
> This patch implements software receive side packet steering (RPS).  RPS
> distributes the load of received packet processing across multiple CPUs.
> 
> Problem statement: Protocol processing done in the NAPI context for received
> packets is serialized per device queue and becomes a bottleneck under high
> packet load.  This substantially limits pps that can be achieved on a single
> queue NIC and provides no scaling with multiple cores.
> 
> This solution queues packets early on in the receive path on the backlog queues
> of other CPUs.   This allows protocol processing (e.g. IP and TCP) to be
> performed on packets in parallel.   For each device (or each receive queue in
> a multi-queue device) a mask of CPUs is set to indicate the CPUs that can
> process packets. A CPU is selected on a per packet basis by hashing contents
> of the packet header (e.g. the TCP or UDP 4-tuple) and using the result to index
> into the CPU mask.  The IPI mechanism is used to raise networking receive
> softirqs between CPUs.  This effectively emulates in software what a multi-queue
> NIC can provide, but is generic requiring no device support.
> 
> Many devices now provide a hash over the 4-tuple on a per packet basis
> (e.g. the Toeplitz hash).  This patch allow drivers to set the HW reported hash
> in an skb field, and that value in turn is used to index into the RPS maps.
> Using the HW generated hash can avoid cache misses on the packet when
> steering it to a remote CPU.
> 
> The CPU mask is set on a per device and per queue basis in the sysfs variable
> /sys/class/net/<device>/queues/rx-<n>/rps_cpus.  This is a set of canonical
> bit maps for receive queues in the device (numbered by <n>).  If a device
> does not support multi-queue, a single variable is used for the device (rx-0).
> 
> Generally, we have found this technique increases pps capabilities of a single
> queue device with good CPU utilization.  Optimal settings for the CPU mask
> seem to depend on architectures and cache hierarcy.  Below are some results
> running 500 instances of netperf TCP_RR test with 1 byte req. and resp.
> Results show cumulative transaction rate and system CPU utilization.
> 
> e1000e on 8 core Intel
>    Without RPS: 108K tps at 33% CPU
>    With RPS:    311K tps at 64% CPU
> 
> forcedeth on 16 core AMD
>    Without RPS: 156K tps at 15% CPU
>    With RPS:    404K tps at 49% CPU
>    
> bnx2x on 16 core AMD
>    Without RPS  567K tps at 61% CPU (4 HW RX queues)
>    Without RPS  738K tps at 96% CPU (8 HW RX queues)
>    With RPS:    854K tps at 76% CPU (4 HW RX queues)
> 
> Caveats:
> - The benefits of this patch are dependent on architecture and cache hierarchy.
> Tuning the masks to get best performance is probably necessary.
> - This patch adds overhead in the path for processing a single packet.  In
> a lightly loaded server this overhead may eliminate the advantages of
> increased parallelism, and possibly cause some relative performance degradation.
> We have found that masks that are cache aware (share same caches with
> the interrupting CPU) mitigate much of this.
> - The RPS masks can be changed dynamically, however whenever the mask is changed
> this introduces the possibility of generating out of order packets.  It's
> probably best not change the masks too frequently.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>
> 

Well, I tested this on my dev machine, with a vlan over bonding setup,
tg3 and bnx2 drivers (mono queue), and all is good. UDP bench not
anymore using 100% of one cpu and dropping frames.

Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>

Thanks Herbert, this gives a very good fanout of network load on cpus,
this is a huge improvement, I cannot wait 2.6.35 :)


--
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