[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YamTSiiDp2mpeaXc@TonyMac-Alibaba>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2021 11:47:22 +0800
From: Tony Lu <tonylu@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: kgraul@...ux.ibm.com, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net/smc: Clear memory when release and reuse buffer
On Fri, Nov 26, 2021 at 11:28:55AM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 25 Nov 2021 20:28:59 +0800 Tony Lu wrote:
> > Currently, buffers are clear when smc create connections and reuse
> > buffer. It will slow down the speed of establishing new connection. In
> > most cases, the applications hope to establish connections as quickly as
> > possible.
> >
> > This patch moves memset() from connection creation path to release and
> > buffer unuse path, this trades off between speed of establishing and
> > release.
> >
> > Test environments:
> > - CPU Intel Xeon Platinum 8 core, mem 32 GiB, nic Mellanox CX4
> > - socket sndbuf / rcvbuf: 16384 / 131072 bytes
> > - w/o first round, 5 rounds, avg, 100 conns batch per round
> > - smc_buf_create() use bpftrace kprobe, introduces extra latency
> >
> > Latency benchmarks for smc_buf_create():
> > w/o patch : 19040.0 ns
> > w/ patch : 1932.6 ns
> > ratio : 10.2% (-89.8%)
> >
> > Latency benchmarks for socket create and connect:
> > w/o patch : 143.3 us
> > w/ patch : 102.2 us
> > ratio : 71.3% (-28.7%)
> >
> > The latency of establishing connections is reduced by 28.7%.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tony Lu <tonylu@...ux.alibaba.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Wen Gu <guwen@...ux.alibaba.com>
>
> The tag in the subject seems incorrect, we tag things as [PATCH net]
> if they are fixes, and as [PATCH net-next] if they are new features,
> code refactoring or performance improvements.
>
> Is this a fix for a regression? In which case we need a Fixes tag to
> indicate where it was introduced. Otherwise it needs to be tagged as
> [PATCH net-next].
>
> I'm assuming Karsten will take it via his tree, otherwise you'll need
> to repost.
Sorry to miss Graul’s email, he said he would put it in his own tree. I
would send v2 out if he needed. Thank you.
Thanks,
Tony Lu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists