netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] virtio_net: migrate mergeable rx buffers to page frag allocators

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: <20131029191734.GF20848@redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 29 Oct 2013 21:17:34 +0200
From:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To:	Michael Dalton <mwdalton@...gle.com>
Cc:	Eric Northup <digitaleric@...gle.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>,
	lf-virt <virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] virtio_net: migrate mergeable rx buffers to
 page frag allocators

On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 12:05:27PM -0700, Michael Dalton wrote:
> Agreed Eric, the buffer size should be increased so that we can accommodate a
> MTU-sized packet + mergeable virtio net header in a single buffer. I will send
> a patch to fix shortly cleaning up the #define headers as Rusty indicated and
> increasing the buffer size slightly by VirtioNet header size bytes per Eric.
> 
> Jason, I'll followup with you directly - I'd like to know your exact workload
> (single steam or multi-stream netperf?), VM configuration, etc, and also see if
> the nit that Erichas pointed out affects your results.  It is also
> worth noting that
> we may want to tune the queue sizes for your benchmarks, e.g, by reducing
> buffer size from 4KB to MTU-sized but keeping queue length constant, we're
> implicitly decreasing the number of bytes stored in the VirtioQueue for the
> VirtioNet device, so increasing the queue size may help.
> 
> Best,
> 
> Mike

Well we have 256 descriptors per queue, each descriptor is 16 bytes
already and they have to be physically contigious.
I don't think we can easily increase the queue size much more without
risking memory allocation failures on busy systems.

I guess one approach is to do something like:
	 if (queue size > 1024)
		 use small buffers
	 else
		 use 4K buffers.

That would reduce the risk of regressions for existing users.


-- 
MST
--
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