[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <11588267-c76d-f0ac-bf98-1875e07b58cb@os.amperecomputing.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Mar 2024 09:01:15 -0800 (PST)
From: "Lameter, Christopher" <cl@...amperecomputing.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
cc: Adam Li <adamli@...amperecomputing.com>, corbet@....net,
davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
willemb@...gle.com, yangtiezhu@...ngson.cn, atenart@...nel.org,
kuniyu@...zon.com, wuyun.abel@...edance.com, leitao@...ian.org,
alexander@...alicyn.com, dhowells@...hat.com, paulmck@...nel.org,
joel.granados@...il.com, urezki@...il.com, joel@...lfernandes.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, patches@...erecomputing.com,
shijie@...amperecomputing.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: make SK_MEMORY_PCPU_RESERV tunable
On Wed, 28 Feb 2024, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> __sk_mem_raise_allocated() drops to 0.4%.
>
> I suspect some kind of flow/cpu steering issues then.
> Also maybe SO_RESERVE_MEM would be better for this workload.
This is via loopback. So there is a flow steering issue in the IP
stack?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists