[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <56B208C6.2080201@stressinduktion.org>
Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2016 15:03:50 +0100
From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc: Hans Westgaard Ry <hans.westgaard.ry@...cle.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>,
Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...hat.com>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...e.com>,
Linus Lüssing <linus.luessing@...3.blue>,
Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Alexey Kodanev <alexey.kodanev@...cle.com>,
Håkon Bugge <haakon.bugge@...cle.com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] net:Add sysctl_max_skb_frags
On 03.02.2016 13:20, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 03, 2016 at 12:36:21PM +0100, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
>>
>> Agreed that it feels like a hack, but a rather simple one. I would
>> consider this to be just a performance improvement. We certainly need
>> a slow-path when virtio drivers submit gso packets to the stack (and
>> already discussed with Hans). The sysctl can't help here. But without
>> the sysctl the packets would constantly hit the slow-path in case of
>> e.g. IPoIB and that would also be rather bad.
>
> So you want to penalise every NIC in the system if just one of
> them is broken? This is insane. Just do the partial linearisation
> in that one driver that needs it and not only won't you have to
> penalise anyone else but you still get the best result for that
> driver that needs it.
Most normal Ethernet systems and drivers currently don't need tweating
this knob at all, only some special kinds of installations. This patch
referred to IPoIB as a possible user which drivers/firmware/cards seem
to have this problem. Current behavior just leaves everything as-is.
If you use IPoIB you probably use it quite regular and linearizing an
skbs *always* seems to be much more work than simply capping the number
of frags globally.
> Besides, you have to implement the linearisation anyway because
> of virtualisation.
Yes, the slow-path is necessary. But instead of writing a new
complicated linearizing function to just reduce the fragments we could
also simply linearize it completely and ask the admin to also tune the
vm guests.
I only see this tuning in kind in very specific environments where the
admins now what they do.
Bye,
Hannes
Powered by blists - more mailing lists