[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20170719.135004.334104341161895966.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 13:50:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: xiangxia.m.yue@...il.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, dev@...nvswitch.org, pshelar@....org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] openvswitch: Optimize operations for OvS
flow_stats.
From: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue@...il.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2017 23:28:06 -0700
> When calling the flow_free() to free the flow, we call many times
> (cpu_possible_mask, eg. 128 as default) cpumask_next(). That will
> take up our CPU usage if we call the flow_free() frequently.
> When we put all packets to userspace via upcall, and OvS will send
> them back via netlink to ovs_packet_cmd_execute(will call flow_free).
>
> The test topo is shown as below. VM01 sends TCP packets to VM02,
> and OvS forward packtets. When testing, we use perf to report the
> system performance.
>
> VM01 --- OvS-VM --- VM02
>
> Without this patch, perf-top show as below: The flow_free() is
> 3.02% CPU usage.
>
> 4.23% [kernel] [k] _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore
> 3.62% [kernel] [k] __do_softirq
> 3.16% [kernel] [k] __memcpy
> 3.02% [kernel] [k] flow_free
> 2.42% libc-2.17.so [.] __memcpy_ssse3_back
> 2.18% [kernel] [k] copy_user_generic_unrolled
> 2.17% [kernel] [k] find_next_bit
>
> When applied this patch, perf-top show as below: Not shown on
> the list anymore.
>
> 4.11% [kernel] [k] _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore
> 3.79% [kernel] [k] __do_softirq
> 3.46% [kernel] [k] __memcpy
> 2.73% libc-2.17.so [.] __memcpy_ssse3_back
> 2.25% [kernel] [k] copy_user_generic_unrolled
> 1.89% libc-2.17.so [.] _int_malloc
> 1.53% ovs-vswitchd [.] xlate_actions
>
> With this patch, the TCP throughput(we dont use Megaflow Cache
> + Microflow Cache) between VMs is 1.18Gbs/sec up to 1.30Gbs/sec
> (maybe ~10% performance imporve).
>
> This patch adds cpumask struct, the cpu_used_mask stores the cpu_id
> that the flow used. And we only check the flow_stats on the cpu we
> used, and it is unncessary to check all possible cpu when getting,
> cleaning, and updating the flow_stats. Adding the cpu_used_mask to
> sw_flow struct does’t increase the cacheline number.
>
> Signed-off-by: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue@...il.com>
> Acked-by: Pravin B Shelar <pshelar@....org>
Applied.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists