| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <8fd0313b-8f6f-9814-247d-c2687d053e2a@kernel.org> Date: Mon, 7 Aug 2023 15:15:22 +0200 From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org> To: Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <jbrouer@...hat.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> Cc: "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>, "edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>, "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>, Shenwei Wang <shenwei.wang@....com>, Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@....com>, "ast@...nel.org" <ast@...nel.org>, "daniel@...earbox.net" <daniel@...earbox.net>, "john.fastabend@...il.com" <john.fastabend@...il.com>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, dl-linux-imx <linux-imx@....com>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, "bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>, Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch> Subject: Re: [PATCH V3 net-next] net: fec: add XDP_TX feature support On 07/08/2023 12.30, Wei Fang wrote: >>> The flow-control was not disabled before, so according to your >>> suggestion, I disable the flow-control on the both boards and run the >>> test again, the performance is slightly improved, but still can not >>> see a clear difference between the two methods. Below are the results. >> >> Something else must be stalling the CPU. >> When looking at fec_main.c code, I noticed that >> fec_enet_txq_xmit_frame() will do a MMIO write for every xdp_frame (to >> trigger transmit start), which I believe will stall the CPU. >> The ndo_xdp_xmit/fec_enet_xdp_xmit does bulking, and should be the >> function that does the MMIO write to trigger transmit start. >> > We'd better keep a MMIO write for every xdp_frame on txq, as you know, > the txq will be inactive when no additional ready descriptors remain in the > tx-BDR. So it may increase the delay of the packets if we do a MMIO write > for multiple packets. > You know this hardware better than me, so I will leave to you. >> $ git diff >> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fec_main.c >> b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fec_main.c >> index 03ac7690b5c4..57a6a3899b80 100644 >> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fec_main.c >> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fec_main.c >> @@ -3849,9 +3849,6 @@ static int fec_enet_txq_xmit_frame(struct >> fec_enet_private *fep, >> >> txq->bd.cur = bdp; >> >> - /* Trigger transmission start */ >> - writel(0, txq->bd.reg_desc_active); >> - >> return 0; >> } >> >> @@ -3880,6 +3877,9 @@ static int fec_enet_xdp_xmit(struct net_device >> *dev, >> sent_frames++; >> } >> >> + /* Trigger transmission start */ >> + writel(0, txq->bd.reg_desc_active); >> + >> __netif_tx_unlock(nq); >> >> return sent_frames; >> >> >>> Result: use "sync_dma_len" method >>> root@...8mpevk:~# ./xdp2 eth0 >> >> The xdp2 (and xdp1) program(s) have a performance issue (due to using >> >> Can I ask you to test using xdp_rxq_info, like: >> >> sudo ./xdp_rxq_info --dev mlx5p1 --action XDP_TX >> > Yes, below are the results, the results are also basically the same. > Result 1: current method > ./xdp_rxq_info --dev eth0 --action XDP_TX > Running XDP on dev:eth0 (ifindex:2) action:XDP_TX options:swapmac > XDP stats CPU pps issue-pps > XDP-RX CPU 0 259,102 0 > XDP-RX CPU total 259,102 > RXQ stats RXQ:CPU pps issue-pps > rx_queue_index 0:0 259,102 0 > rx_queue_index 0:sum 259,102 > Running XDP on dev:eth0 (ifindex:2) action:XDP_TX options:swapmac > XDP stats CPU pps issue-pps > XDP-RX CPU 0 259,498 0 > XDP-RX CPU total 259,498 > RXQ stats RXQ:CPU pps issue-pps > rx_queue_index 0:0 259,496 0 > rx_queue_index 0:sum 259,496 > Running XDP on dev:eth0 (ifindex:2) action:XDP_TX options:swapmac > XDP stats CPU pps issue-pps > XDP-RX CPU 0 259,408 0 > XDP-RX CPU total 259,408 > > Result 2: dma_sync_len method > Running XDP on dev:eth0 (ifindex:2) action:XDP_TX options:swapmac > XDP stats CPU pps issue-pps > XDP-RX CPU 0 258,254 0 > XDP-RX CPU total 258,254 > RXQ stats RXQ:CPU pps issue-pps > rx_queue_index 0:0 258,254 0 > rx_queue_index 0:sum 258,254 > Running XDP on dev:eth0 (ifindex:2) action:XDP_TX options:swapmac > XDP stats CPU pps issue-pps > XDP-RX CPU 0 259,316 0 > XDP-RX CPU total 259,316 > RXQ stats RXQ:CPU pps issue-pps > rx_queue_index 0:0 259,318 0 > rx_queue_index 0:sum 259,318 > Running XDP on dev:eth0 (ifindex:2) action:XDP_TX options:swapmac > XDP stats CPU pps issue-pps > XDP-RX CPU 0 259,554 0 > XDP-RX CPU total 259,554 > RXQ stats RXQ:CPU pps issue-pps > rx_queue_index 0:0 259,553 0 > rx_queue_index 0:sum 259,553 > Thanks for running this. >> >>> proto 17: 258886 pkt/s >>> proto 17: 258879 pkt/s >> >> If you provide numbers for xdp_redirect, then we could better evaluate if >> changing the lock per xdp_frame, for XDP_TX also, is worth it. >> > For XDP_REDIRECT, the performance show as follow. > root@...8mpevk:~# ./xdp_redirect eth1 eth0 > Redirecting from eth1 (ifindex 3; driver st_gmac) to eth0 (ifindex 2; driver fec) This is not exactly the same as XDP_TX setup as here you choose to redirect between eth1 (driver st_gmac) and to eth0 (driver fec). I would like to see eth0 to eth0 XDP_REDIRECT, so we can compare to XDP_TX performance. Sorry for all the requests, but can you provide those numbers? > eth1->eth0 221,642 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 221,643 xmit/s So, XDP_REDIRECT is approx (1-(221825/259554))*100 = 14.53% slower. But as this is 'eth1->eth0' this isn't true comparison to XDP_TX. > eth1->eth0 221,761 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 221,760 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 221,793 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 221,794 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 221,825 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 221,825 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 221,823 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 221,821 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 221,815 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 221,816 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 222,016 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 222,016 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 222,059 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 222,059 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 222,085 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 222,089 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 221,956 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 221,952 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 222,070 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 222,071 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 222,017 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 222,017 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 222,069 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 222,067 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 221,986 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 221,987 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 221,932 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 221,936 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 222,045 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 222,041 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 222,014 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 222,014 xmit/s > Packets received : 3,772,908 > Average packets/s : 221,936 > Packets transmitted : 3,772,908 > Average transmit/s : 221,936 >> And also find out of moving the MMIO write have any effect. >> > I move the MMIO write to fec_enet_xdp_xmit(), the result shows as follow, > the performance is slightly improved. > I'm puzzled that moving the MMIO write isn't change performance. Can you please verify that the packet generator machine is sending more frame than the system can handle? (meaning the pktgen_sample03_burst_single_flow.sh script fast enough?) > root@...8mpevk:~# ./xdp_redirect eth1 eth0 > Redirecting from eth1 (ifindex 3; driver st_gmac) to eth0 (ifindex 2; driver fec) > eth1->eth0 222,666 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 222,668 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 221,663 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 221,664 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 222,743 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 222,741 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 222,917 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 222,923 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 221,810 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 221,808 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 222,891 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 222,888 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 222,983 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 222,984 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 221,655 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 221,653 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 222,827 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 222,827 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 221,728 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 221,728 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 222,790 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 222,789 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 222,874 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 222,874 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 221,888 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 221,887 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 223,057 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 223,056 xmit/s > eth1->eth0 222,219 rx/s 0 err,drop/s 222,220 xmit/s > Packets received : 3,336,711 > Average packets/s : 222,447 > Packets transmitted : 3,336,710 > Average transmit/s : 222,447 > >> I also noticed driver does a MMIO write (on rxq) for every RX-packet in >> fec_enet_rx_queue() napi-poll loop. This also looks like a potential >> performance stall. >> > The same as txq, the rxq will be inactive if the rx-BDR has no free BDs, so we'd > better do a MMIO write when we recycle a BD, so that the hardware can timely > attach the received pakcets on the rx-BDR. > > In addition, I also tried to avoid using xdp_convert_buff_to_frame(), but the > performance of XDP_TX is still not improved. :( > I would not expect much performance improvement from this anyhow. > After these days of testing, I think it's best to keep the solution in V3, and then > make some optimizations on the V3 patch. I agree. I think you need to send a V5, and then I can ACK that. Thanks for all this testing, --Jesper
Powered by blists - more mailing lists