[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170203142403.52eca52f@xeon-e3>
Date: Fri, 3 Feb 2017 14:24:03 -0800
From: Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
To: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
roopa@...ulusnetworks.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 4/4] bridge: add ability to turn off fdb
used updates
On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 19:34:19 +0100
Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com> wrote:
> On 03/02/17 19:28, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > On Fri, 3 Feb 2017 09:30:37 +0100
> > Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 03/02/17 03:47, David Miller wrote:
> >>> From: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>
> >>> Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2017 16:31:58 +0100
> >>>
> >>>> @@ -197,7 +197,8 @@ int br_handle_frame_finish(struct net *net, struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb
> >>>> if (dst->is_local)
> >>>> return br_pass_frame_up(skb);
> >>>>
> >>>> - dst->used = jiffies;
> >>>> + if (br->used_enabled)
> >>>> + dst->used = jiffies;
> >>>
> >>> Have you tried:
> >>>
> >>> if (dst->used != jiffies)
> >>> dst->used = jiffies;
> >>>
> >>> If that isn't effective, you can tweak the test to decrease the
> >>> granularity of the value. Basically, if dst->used is within
> >>> 1 HZ of jiffies, don't do the write.
> >>>
> >>> I suspect this might help a lot, and not require a new bridging
> >>> option.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Yes, I actually have a patch titled "used granularity". :-) I've tested with different
> >> values and it does help but it either needs to be paired with another similar test for
> >> the "updated" field (since they share a write-heavy cache line) or they need to be
> >> in separate cache lines to avoid that dst's source port from causing the load HitM for
> >> all who check the value.
> >>
> >> I'll run some more tests and probably go this way for now.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Nik
> >>
> >
> > Since used doesn't need HZ granularity, it reports values in clock_t resolution so
> > storing (and doing cmp and set would mean that it would only be 100 HZ
> >
>
> Yes, exactly what I'm currently testing. Will post the new set soon.
> Since HZ can be different a generic way to obtain the granularity for
> both should be clock_t_to_jiffies(1) if I'm not missing something.
>
>
USER_HZ is set by userspace ABI to 100 hz. HZ is configurable when kernel is built.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists