| Message ID | 52FA32C5.9040601@huawei.com |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested, archived |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
On Tue, 2014-02-11 at 22:25 +0800, Qin Chuanyu wrote: > we could xmit directly instead of going through softirq to gain > throughput and lantency improved. > test model: VM-Host-Host just do transmit. with vhost thread and nic > interrupt bind cpu1. netperf do throuhput test and qperf do lantency test. > Host OS: suse11sp3, Guest OS: suse11sp3 > > latency result(us): > packet_len 64 256 512 1460 > old(UDP) 44 47 48 66 > new(UDP) 38 41 42 66 > > old(TCP) 52 55 70 117 > new(TCP) 45 48 61 114 > > throughput result(Gbit/s): > packet_len 64 512 1024 1460 > old(UDP) 0.42 2.02 3.75 4.68 > new(UDP) 0.45 2.14 3.77 5.06 > > TCP due to the latency, client couldn't send packet big enough > to get benefit from TSO of nic, so the result show it will send > more packet per sencond but get lower throughput. > > Eric mentioned that it would has problem with cgroup, but the patch > had been sent by Herbert Xu. > patch_id f845172531fb7410c7fb7780b1a6e51ee6df7d52 > > Signed-off-by: Chuanyu Qin <qinchuanyu@huawei.com> > --- > drivers/net/tun.c | 4 +++- > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/tun.c b/drivers/net/tun.c > index 44c4db8..90b4e58 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/tun.c > +++ b/drivers/net/tun.c > @@ -1184,7 +1184,9 @@ static ssize_t tun_get_user(struct tun_struct > *tun, struct tun_file *tfile, > skb_probe_transport_header(skb, 0); > > rxhash = skb_get_hash(skb); > - netif_rx_ni(skb); > + rcu_read_lock_bh(); > + netif_receive_skb(skb); > + rcu_read_unlock_bh(); > > tun->dev->stats.rx_packets++; > tun->dev->stats.rx_bytes += len; I already said this patch is not good : rcu_read_lock_bh() makes no sense here. What is really needed is local_bh_disable(); Herbert patch ( http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/52963/ ) had a much cleaner form. Just use it, CC him, credit him, please ? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 07:24:04AM -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Tue, 2014-02-11 at 22:25 +0800, Qin Chuanyu wrote: > > we could xmit directly instead of going through softirq to gain > > throughput and lantency improved. > > test model: VM-Host-Host just do transmit. with vhost thread and nic > > interrupt bind cpu1. netperf do throuhput test and qperf do lantency test. > > Host OS: suse11sp3, Guest OS: suse11sp3 > > > > latency result(us): > > packet_len 64 256 512 1460 > > old(UDP) 44 47 48 66 > > new(UDP) 38 41 42 66 > > > > old(TCP) 52 55 70 117 > > new(TCP) 45 48 61 114 > > > > throughput result(Gbit/s): > > packet_len 64 512 1024 1460 > > old(UDP) 0.42 2.02 3.75 4.68 > > new(UDP) 0.45 2.14 3.77 5.06 > > > > TCP due to the latency, client couldn't send packet big enough > > to get benefit from TSO of nic, so the result show it will send > > more packet per sencond but get lower throughput. > > > > Eric mentioned that it would has problem with cgroup, but the patch > > had been sent by Herbert Xu. > > patch_id f845172531fb7410c7fb7780b1a6e51ee6df7d52 > > > > Signed-off-by: Chuanyu Qin <qinchuanyu@huawei.com> > > --- > > drivers/net/tun.c | 4 +++- > > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/tun.c b/drivers/net/tun.c > > index 44c4db8..90b4e58 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/tun.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/tun.c > > @@ -1184,7 +1184,9 @@ static ssize_t tun_get_user(struct tun_struct > > *tun, struct tun_file *tfile, > > skb_probe_transport_header(skb, 0); > > > > rxhash = skb_get_hash(skb); > > - netif_rx_ni(skb); > > + rcu_read_lock_bh(); > > + netif_receive_skb(skb); > > + rcu_read_unlock_bh(); > > > > tun->dev->stats.rx_packets++; > > tun->dev->stats.rx_bytes += len; > > I already said this patch is not good : > > rcu_read_lock_bh() makes no sense here. > > What is really needed is local_bh_disable(); > > Herbert patch ( http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/52963/ ) had a much > cleaner form. > > Just use it, CC him, credit him, please ? > But not before making sure (testing) that patch does not break the cgroups classifier please.
On 02/11/2014 10:25 PM, Qin Chuanyu wrote: > we could xmit directly instead of going through softirq to gain > throughput and lantency improved. > test model: VM-Host-Host just do transmit. with vhost thread and nic > interrupt bind cpu1. netperf do throuhput test and qperf do lantency > test. > Host OS: suse11sp3, Guest OS: suse11sp3 > > latency result(us): > packet_len 64 256 512 1460 > old(UDP) 44 47 48 66 > new(UDP) 38 41 42 66 > > old(TCP) 52 55 70 117 > new(TCP) 45 48 61 114 > > throughput result(Gbit/s): > packet_len 64 512 1024 1460 > old(UDP) 0.42 2.02 3.75 4.68 > new(UDP) 0.45 2.14 3.77 5.06 > > TCP due to the latency, client couldn't send packet big enough > to get benefit from TSO of nic, so the result show it will send > more packet per sencond but get lower throughput. > > Eric mentioned that it would has problem with cgroup, but the patch > had been sent by Herbert Xu. > patch_id f845172531fb7410c7fb7780b1a6e51ee6df7d52 > > Signed-off-by: Chuanyu Qin <qinchuanyu@huawei.com> > --- A question: without NAPI weight, could this starve other net devices? > drivers/net/tun.c | 4 +++- > 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/tun.c b/drivers/net/tun.c > index 44c4db8..90b4e58 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/tun.c > +++ b/drivers/net/tun.c > @@ -1184,7 +1184,9 @@ static ssize_t tun_get_user(struct tun_struct > *tun, struct tun_file *tfile, > skb_probe_transport_header(skb, 0); > > rxhash = skb_get_hash(skb); > - netif_rx_ni(skb); > + rcu_read_lock_bh(); > + netif_receive_skb(skb); > + rcu_read_unlock_bh(); > > tun->dev->stats.rx_packets++; > tun->dev->stats.rx_bytes += len; -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 13:28 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> A question: without NAPI weight, could this starve other net devices?
Not really, as net devices are serviced by softirq handler.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 02/12/2014 01:47 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 13:28 +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > >> A question: without NAPI weight, could this starve other net devices? > Not really, as net devices are serviced by softirq handler. > > Yes, then the issue is tun could be starved by other net devices. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 13:50 +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > On 02/12/2014 01:47 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 13:28 +0800, Jason Wang wrote: > > > >> A question: without NAPI weight, could this starve other net devices? > > Not really, as net devices are serviced by softirq handler. > > > > > > Yes, then the issue is tun could be starved by other net devices. How this patch changes anything to this 'problem' ? netif_rx_ni() can only be called if your process is not preempted by other high prio tasks/softirqs. If this process is scheduled on a cpu, then disabling bh to process _one_ packet wont fundamentally change dynamic of the system. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 2014/2/12 13:28, Jason Wang wrote: > A question: without NAPI weight, could this starve other net devices? tap xmit skb use thread context，the poll func of physical nic driver could be called in softirq context without change. I had test it by binding vhost thread and physic nic interrupt on the same vcpu, use netperf xmit udp, test model is VM1-Host1-Host2. if only VM1 xmit skb, the top show as below : Cpu1 :0.0%us, 95.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 0.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 5.0%si, 0.0%st then use host2 xmit skb to VM1, the top show as below : Cpu1 :0.0%us, 41.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 0.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 59.0%si, 0.0%st so I think there is no problem with this change. >> drivers/net/tun.c | 4 +++- >> 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/net/tun.c b/drivers/net/tun.c >> index 44c4db8..90b4e58 100644 >> --- a/drivers/net/tun.c >> +++ b/drivers/net/tun.c >> @@ -1184,7 +1184,9 @@ static ssize_t tun_get_user(struct tun_struct >> *tun, struct tun_file *tfile, >> skb_probe_transport_header(skb, 0); >> >> rxhash = skb_get_hash(skb); >> - netif_rx_ni(skb); >> + rcu_read_lock_bh(); >> + netif_receive_skb(skb); >> + rcu_read_unlock_bh(); >> >> tun->dev->stats.rx_packets++; >> tun->dev->stats.rx_bytes += len; > > > . > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 02/12/2014 02:26 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 13:50 +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >> On 02/12/2014 01:47 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote: >>> On Wed, 2014-02-12 at 13:28 +0800, Jason Wang wrote: >>> >>>> A question: without NAPI weight, could this starve other net devices? >>> Not really, as net devices are serviced by softirq handler. >>> >>> >> Yes, then the issue is tun could be starved by other net devices. > How this patch changes anything to this 'problem' ? > > netif_rx_ni() can only be called if your process is not preempted by > other high prio tasks/softirqs. > > If this process is scheduled on a cpu, then disabling bh to process > _one_ packet wont fundamentally change dynamic of the system. > After looking at the code for a while, I agree it won't be a great change. Thanks -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
On 02/12/2014 02:46 PM, Qin Chuanyu wrote: > On 2014/2/12 13:28, Jason Wang wrote: > >> A question: without NAPI weight, could this starve other net devices? > tap xmit skb use thread context，the poll func of physical nic driver > could be called in softirq context without change. > > I had test it by binding vhost thread and physic nic interrupt on the > same vcpu, use netperf xmit udp, test model is VM1-Host1-Host2. > > if only VM1 xmit skb, the top show as below : > Cpu1 :0.0%us, 95.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 0.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 5.0%si, 0.0%st > > then use host2 xmit skb to VM1, the top show as below : > Cpu1 :0.0%us, 41.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 0.0%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 59.0%si, 0.0%st > > so I think there is no problem with this change. Yes, I realize it was ok after Eric's comment. Thanks -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/drivers/net/tun.c b/drivers/net/tun.c index 44c4db8..90b4e58 100644 --- a/drivers/net/tun.c +++ b/drivers/net/tun.c @@ -1184,7 +1184,9 @@ static ssize_t tun_get_user(struct tun_struct *tun, struct tun_file *tfile, skb_probe_transport_header(skb, 0); rxhash = skb_get_hash(skb); - netif_rx_ni(skb); + rcu_read_lock_bh(); + netif_receive_skb(skb); + rcu_read_unlock_bh(); tun->dev->stats.rx_packets++;
we could xmit directly instead of going through softirq to gain throughput and lantency improved. test model: VM-Host-Host just do transmit. with vhost thread and nic interrupt bind cpu1. netperf do throuhput test and qperf do lantency test. Host OS: suse11sp3, Guest OS: suse11sp3 latency result(us): packet_len 64 256 512 1460 old(UDP) 44 47 48 66 new(UDP) 38 41 42 66 old(TCP) 52 55 70 117 new(TCP) 45 48 61 114 throughput result(Gbit/s): packet_len 64 512 1024 1460 old(UDP) 0.42 2.02 3.75 4.68 new(UDP) 0.45 2.14 3.77 5.06 TCP due to the latency, client couldn't send packet big enough to get benefit from TSO of nic, so the result show it will send more packet per sencond but get lower throughput. Eric mentioned that it would has problem with cgroup, but the patch had been sent by Herbert Xu. patch_id f845172531fb7410c7fb7780b1a6e51ee6df7d52 Signed-off-by: Chuanyu Qin <qinchuanyu@huawei.com> --- drivers/net/tun.c | 4 +++- 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) tun->dev->stats.rx_bytes += len;