[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <willemdebruijn.kernel.111bed09b8999@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2025 11:01:30 -0400
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...gle.com>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org,
eric.dumazet@...il.com,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 06/10] udp: update sk_rmem_alloc before busylock
acquisition
Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Avoid piling too many producers on the busylock
> by updating sk_rmem_alloc before busylock acquisition.
>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> ---
> net/ipv4/udp.c | 7 +++++--
> 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/udp.c b/net/ipv4/udp.c
> index edd846fee90ff7850356a5cb3400ce96856e5429..658ae87827991a78c25c2172d52e772c94ea217f 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/udp.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/udp.c
> @@ -1753,13 +1753,16 @@ int __udp_enqueue_schedule_skb(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb)
> if (rmem > (rcvbuf >> 1)) {
> skb_condense(skb);
> size = skb->truesize;
> + rmem = atomic_add_return(size, &sk->sk_rmem_alloc);
> + if (rmem > rcvbuf)
> + goto uncharge_drop;
This does more than just reorganize code. Can you share some context
on the behavioral change?
> busy = busylock_acquire(sk);
> + } else {
> + atomic_add(size, &sk->sk_rmem_alloc);
> }
>
> udp_set_dev_scratch(skb);
>
> - atomic_add(size, &sk->sk_rmem_alloc);
> -
> spin_lock(&list->lock);
> err = udp_rmem_schedule(sk, size);
> if (err) {
> --
> 2.51.0.384.g4c02a37b29-goog
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists