[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1472486640-1111-1-git-send-email-hejianet@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2016 00:03:54 +0800
From: Jia He <hejianet@...il.com>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
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>,
Vlad Yasevich <vyasevich@...il.com>,
Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
Jia He <hejianet@...il.com>
Subject: [RFC PATCH 0/6] Reduce cache miss for snmp_fold_field
In a PowerPc server with large cpu number(160), besides commit
a3a773726c9f ("net: Optimize snmp stat aggregation by walking all
the percpu data at once"), I watched several other snmp_fold_field
callsites which will cause high cache miss rate.
#My simple test case, which read from the procfs items endlessly:
/***********************************************************/
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <sys/types.h>
#include <sys/stat.h>
#include <fcntl.h>
#define LINELEN 2560
int main(int argc, char **argv)
{
int i;
int fd = -1 ;
int rdsize = 0;
char buf[LINELEN+1];
buf[LINELEN] = 0;
memset(buf,0,LINELEN);
if(1 >= argc) {
printf("file name empty\n");
return -1;
}
fd = open(argv[1], O_RDWR, 0644);
if(0 > fd){
printf("open error\n");
return -2;
}
for(i=0;i<0xffffffff;i++) {
while(0 < (rdsize = read(fd,buf,LINELEN))){
//nothing here
}
lseek(fd, 0, SEEK_SET);
}
close(fd);
return 0;
}
/**********************************************************/
#compile and run:
gcc test.c -o test
perf stat -d -e cache-misses ./test /proc/net/snmp
perf stat -d -e cache-misses ./test /proc/net/snmp6
perf stat -d -e cache-misses ./test /proc/net/netstat
perf stat -d -e cache-misses ./test /proc/net/sctp/snmp
perf stat -d -e cache-misses ./test /proc/net/xfrm_stat
#test results
I firstly test the correctness of data statistics.
As for performance, before the patch set:
====================
Performance counter stats for 'system wide':
355911097 cache-misses [40.08%]
2356829300 L1-dcache-loads [60.04%]
355642645 L1-dcache-load-misses # 15.09% of all L1-dcache hits [60.02%]
346544541 LLC-loads [59.97%]
389763 LLC-load-misses # 0.11% of all LL-cache hits [40.02%]
6.245162638 seconds time elapsed
After the patch set:
===================
Performance counter stats for 'system wide':
194992476 cache-misses [40.03%]
6718051877 L1-dcache-loads [60.07%]
194871921 L1-dcache-load-misses # 2.90% of all L1-dcache hits [60.11%]
187632232 LLC-loads [60.04%]
464466 LLC-load-misses # 0.25% of all LL-cache hits [39.89%]
6.868422769 seconds time elapsed
The cache-miss rate can be reduced from 15% to 2.9%
Jia He (6):
proc: Reduce cache miss in {snmp,netstat}_seq_show
proc: Reduce cache miss in snmp6_seq_show
proc: Reduce cache miss in sctp_snmp_seq_show
proc: Reduce cache miss in xfrm_statistics_seq_show
ipv6: Remove useless parameter in __snmp6_fill_statsdev
net: Suppress the "Comparison to NULL could be written" warning
net/ipv4/proc.c | 110 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------
net/ipv6/addrconf.c | 12 +++---
net/ipv6/proc.c | 47 ++++++++++++++++------
net/sctp/proc.c | 15 +++++--
net/xfrm/xfrm_proc.c | 15 +++++--
5 files changed, 131 insertions(+), 68 deletions(-)
--
1.8.3.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists