netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 0/6] implement kthread based napi poll

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CANn89iKAaKnZb3+RdMkK+Lx+5BBs=0Lnzwhe_jkzP4A8qHFZTg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 25 Sep 2020 20:23:37 +0200
From:   Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To:     Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc:     Wei Wang <weiwan@...gle.com>,
        Magnus Karlsson <magnus.karlsson@...il.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
        Felix Fietkau <nbd@....name>,
        Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next 0/6] implement kthread based napi poll

On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 8:16 PM Stephen Hemminger
<stephen@...workplumber.org> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 10:15:25 -0700
> Wei Wang <weiwan@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> > > > In terms of performance, I ran tcp_rr tests with 1000 flows with
> > > > various request/response sizes, with RFS/RPS disabled, and compared
> > > > performance between softirq vs kthread. Host has 56 hyper threads and
> > > > 100Gbps nic.
>
> It would be good to similar tests on othere hardware. Not everyone has
> server class hardware. There are people running web servers on untuned
> servers over 10 years old; this may cause a regression there.
>
> Not to mention the slower CPU's in embedded systems. How would this
> impact OpenWrt or Android?

Most probably you won't notice a significant difference.

Switching to a kthread is quite cheap, since you have no MMU games to play with.

>
> Another potential problem is that if you run real time (SCH_FIFO)
> threads they have higher priority than kthread. So for that use
> case, moving networking to kthread would break them.

Sure, playing with FIFO threads is dangerous.

Note that our plan is still to have softirqs by default.

If an admin chose to use kthreads, it is its choice, not ours.

This is also why I very much prefer the kthread approach to the work
queue, since the work queue could not be fine tuned.