[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1272545108.2222.65.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Thu, 29 Apr 2010 14:45:08 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Changli Gao <xiaosuo@...il.com>
Cc: hadi@...erus.ca, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
therbert@...gle.com, shemminger@...tta.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Eilon Greenstein <eilong@...adcom.com>,
Brian Bloniarz <bmb@...enacr.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6] net: speedup udp receive path
Le jeudi 29 avril 2010 à 20:12 +0800, Changli Gao a écrit :
> On Thu, Apr 29, 2010 at 7:35 PM, jamal <hadi@...erus.ca> wrote:
> >
> > Same here - even in my worst case scenario 88.5% of 750Kpps > 600Kpps.
> > Attached is history results to make more sense of what i am saying:
> > we have net-next kernels from apr14, apr23, apr23 with changlis change,
> > apr28, apr28 with your change. What you'll see is non-rps (blue) gets
> > better and rps (Orange) gets better slowly then by apr28 it is worse.
>
> Did the number of IPIs increase in the apr28 test? The finial patch
> with Eric's change may introduce more IPIs. And I am wondering why
> 23rdcl-non-rps is better than before. Maybe it is the side effect of
> my patch: enlarge the netdev_max_backlog.
>
>
Changli, I wonder how you can cook "performance" patches without testing
them at all for real... This cannot be true ?
When the cpu doing the device softirq is flooded, it handles 300 packets
per net_rx_action() round (netdev_budget), so sends at most 6 ipis per
300 packets, with or without my patch, with or without your patch as
well.
(At most because if remote cpus are flooded as well, they dont
napi_complete so no IPI needed at all)
(My patch had an effect only on normal load, ie one packet received in a
while... up to 50.000 pps I would say). And it also has a nice effect on
non RPS loads (mostly the more typical load for following years).
If a second packet comes 3us after the first one, and before 2nd CPU
handled it, we _can_ afford an extra IPI.
750.000/50 = 15.000 IPI per second.
Even with 200.000 IPI per second, 'perf top -C CPU_IPI_sender' shows
that sending IPI is very cheap (maybe ~1% of cpu cycles)
# Samples: 32033467127
#
# Overhead Command Shared Object Symbol
# ........ .............. ................. ......
#
18.05% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] poll_idle
10.91% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] bnx2x_rx_int
10.42% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] eth_type_trans
5.72% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] kmem_cache_alloc_node
5.43% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __memset
5.20% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] get_rps_cpu
4.82% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __slab_alloc
4.34% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] get_partial_node
4.22% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_lock
3.41% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __kmalloc_node_track_caller
3.01% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __alloc_skb
2.22% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] enqueue_to_backlog
2.10% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] vlan_gro_common
1.34% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] swiotlb_map_page
1.25% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] skb_put
1.06% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] _raw_spin_lock_irqsave
0.92% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] dev_gro_receive
0.88% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] swiotlb_dma_mapping_error
0.83% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] vlan_gro_receive
0.83% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __phys_addr
0.83% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __napi_complete
0.83% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] default_send_IPI_mask_sequence_phys
0.77% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] is_swiotlb_buffer
0.76% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __netdev_alloc_skb
0.74% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] deactivate_slab
0.73% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] netif_receive_skb
0.72% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] unmap_single
0.69% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] csd_lock
0.63% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] bnx2x_poll
0.61% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] bnx2x_msix_fp_int
0.59% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] irq_entries_start
0.59% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] swiotlb_sync_single
0.54% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] get_slab
0.46% init [kernel.kallsyms] [k] napi_skb_finish
--
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