netdev - Re: [patch net-next] virtio_net: add support for Byte Queue Limits

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: <20240515041909-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 15 May 2024 04:20:04 -0400
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
	kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, jasowang@...hat.com,
	xuanzhuo@...ux.alibaba.com, virtualization@...ts.linux.dev,
	ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, hawk@...nel.org,
	john.fastabend@...il.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next] virtio_net: add support for Byte Queue Limits

On Wed, May 15, 2024 at 09:34:08AM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> Fri, May 10, 2024 at 01:27:08PM CEST, mst@...hat.com wrote:
> >On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 01:11:49PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> Fri, May 10, 2024 at 12:52:52PM CEST, mst@...hat.com wrote:
> >> >On Fri, May 10, 2024 at 12:37:15PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> >> Thu, May 09, 2024 at 04:28:12PM CEST, mst@...hat.com wrote:
> >> >> >On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 03:31:56PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> >> >> Thu, May 09, 2024 at 02:41:39PM CEST, mst@...hat.com wrote:
> >> >> >> >On Thu, May 09, 2024 at 01:46:15PM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
> >> >> >> >> From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>
> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> Add support for Byte Queue Limits (BQL).
> >> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...dia.com>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Can we get more detail on the benefits you observe etc?
> >> >> >> >Thanks!
> >> >> >> 
> >> >> >> More info about the BQL in general is here:
> >> >> >> https://lwn.net/Articles/469652/
> >> >> >
> >> >> >I know about BQL in general. We discussed BQL for virtio in the past
> >> >> >mostly I got the feedback from net core maintainers that it likely won't
> >> >> >benefit virtio.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Do you have some link to that, or is it this thread:
> >> >> https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/21384cb5-99a6-7431-1039-b356521e1bc3@redhat.com/
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >A quick search on lore turned up this, for example:
> >> >https://lore.kernel.org/all/a11eee78-b2a1-3dbc-4821-b5f4bfaae819@gmail.com/
> >> 
> >> Says:
> >> "Note that NIC with many TX queues make BQL almost useless, only adding extra
> >>  overhead."
> >> 
> >> But virtio can have one tx queue, I guess that could be quite common
> >> configuration in lot of deployments.
> >
> >Not sure we should worry about performance for these though.
> >What I am saying is this should come with some benchmarking
> >results.
> 
> I did some measurements with VDPA, backed by ConnectX6dx NIC, single
> queue pair:
> 
> super_netperf 200 -H $ip -l 45 -t TCP_STREAM &
> nice -n 20 netperf -H $ip -l 10 -t TCP_RR
> 
> RR result with no bql:
> 29.95
> 32.74
> 28.77
> 
> RR result with bql:
> 222.98
> 159.81
> 197.88
> 

Okay. And on the other hand, any measureable degradation with
multiqueue and when testing throughput?


> 
> >
> >
> >> 
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >> I don't see why virtio should be any different from other
> >> >> drivers/devices that benefit from bql. HOL blocking is the same here are
> >> >> everywhere.
> >> >> 
> >> >> >
> >> >> >So I'm asking, what kind of benefit do you observe?
> >> >> 
> >> >> I don't have measurements at hand, will attach them to v2.
> >> >> 
> >> >> Thanks!
> >> >> 
> >> >> >
> >> >> >-- 
> >> >> >MST
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >