netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] sfc: default config to 1 channel/core in local NUMA node only

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Message-ID: <20220210082249.0e50668b@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Thu, 10 Feb 2022 08:22:49 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Íñigo Huguet <ihuguet@...hat.com>
Cc:     Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@...il.com>, habetsm.xilinx@...il.com,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] sfc: default config to 1 channel/core in
 local NUMA node only

On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 10:35:53 +0100 Íñigo Huguet wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 7, 2022 at 5:53 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, 7 Feb 2022 16:03:01 +0100 Íñigo Huguet wrote:  
> > > I have a few busy weeks coming, but I can do this after that.
> > >
> > > With num_cores / 2 you divide by 2 because you're assuming 2 NUMA
> > > nodes, or just the plain number 2?  
> >
> > Plain number 2, it's just a heuristic which seems to work okay.
> > One queue per core (IOW without the /2) is still way too many queues
> > for normal DC workloads.
> 
> Maybe it's because of being quite special workloads, but I have
> encountered problems related to queues in different NUMA nodes in 2
> cases: XDP performance being almost half with more RX queues because
> of being in different node (the example in my patches) and a customer
> losing UDP packets which was solved reducing the number of RX queues
> so all them are in the same node.

Right, no argument, NUMA tuning will still be necessary. 
I'm primarily concerned about providing a sensible default
for workloads which are not network heavy and therefore
nobody spends time tuning their queue configuration.
Any network-heavy workload will likely always benefit from tuning.

The status quo is that our current default returned by
netif_get_num_default_rss_queues() is 8 which is inadequate 
for modern servers, and people end up implementing their own
logic in the drivers.

I'm fine with sfc doing its own thing (at least for now) and 
therefore your patches as they are, but for new drivers I want
to be able to recommend netif_get_num_default_rss_queues() with
a clear conscience.

Does that make sense?