[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20230228163453.GA11370@breakpoint.cc>
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2023 17:34:53 +0100
From: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
To: Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>,
edumazet@...gle.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
pabeni@...hat.com, shakeelb@...gle.com, soheil@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: avoid indirect memory pressure calls
Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@...el.com> wrote:
> From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
> Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2023 15:27:41 -0800
>
> > On Fri, 24 Feb 2023 19:46:06 +0100 Florian Westphal wrote:
> >> There is a noticeable tcp performance regression (loopback or cross-netns),
> >> seen with iperf3 -Z (sendfile mode) when generic retpolines are needed.
> >>
> >> With SK_RECLAIM_THRESHOLD checks gone number of calls to enter/leave
> >> memory pressure happen much more often. For TCP indirect calls are
> >> used.
> >>
> >> We can't remove the if-set-return short-circuit check in
> >> tcp_enter_memory_pressure because there are callers other than
> >> sk_enter_memory_pressure. Doing a check in the sk wrapper too
> >> reduces the indirect calls enough to recover some performance.
> >>
> >> Before,
> >> 0.00-60.00 sec 322 GBytes 46.1 Gbits/sec receiver
> >>
> >> After:
> >> 0.00-60.04 sec 359 GBytes 51.4 Gbits/sec receiver
> >>
> >> "iperf3 -c $peer -t 60 -Z -f g", connected via veth in another netns.
> >>
> >> Fixes: 4890b686f408 ("net: keep sk->sk_forward_alloc as small as possible")
> >> Signed-off-by: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
> >
> > Looks acceptable, Eric?
> >
> I'm no Eric, but I'd only change this:
>
> + if (!memory_pressure || READ_ONCE(*memory_pressure) == 0)
>
> to
>
> + if (!memory_pressure || !READ_ONCE(*memory_pressure))
I intentioanlly used '== 0', i found it too easy to miss the '!' before
'R'. But maybe I just need better glasses.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists