On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 06:07:35PM +0800, Feng Tang wrote:
On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 11:23:14PM +0800, Feng Tang wrote:
> Hi Eric,
>
> On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 05:21:40AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 3:31 AM Feng Tang <feng.tang(a)intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 02:34:36PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote:
> > > > Greeting,
> > > >
> > > > FYI, we noticed a -25.7% regression of netperf.Throughput_Mbps due to
commit:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > commit: 8b27dae5a2e89a61c46c6dbc76c040c0e6d0ed4c ("tcp: add one
skb cache for rx")
> > > >
https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git
master
> > >
> > > Hi Eric,
> > >
> > > Could you help to check this? thanks,
> > >
> >
> > Hmmm... patch is old and had some bugs that have been fixed.
> >
> > What numbers do you have with more recent kernels ?
>
>
> I just run the test with 5.2-rc2, and the regression is still there.
Hi Eric,
Any hint on this?
>From the perf data, the spinlock contention has an obvious increase:
9.28 +7.6 16.91
perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath._raw_spin_lock.free_one_page.__free_pages_ok.___pskb_trim
18.55 +8.6 27.14
perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath._raw_spin_lock_irqsave.get_page_from_freelist.__alloc_pages_nodemask.skb_page_frag_refill
Hi Eric,
Any thoughts?
Actually I did some further check. The increased lock contention
comes from the mm zone lock for page alloc/free. I did an
experiment by changing the SKB_FRAG_PAGE_ORDER from 32K to 64K,
the lock contention is dramatically reduced, and the throughput
got some recovery (10% ~ 15% gain) depending on HW platform, but
can't fully recover the -25.7% loss. Hope this info helps.
Thanks,
Feng
And for commit 8b27dae5a2 ("tcp: add one skb cache for rx"), IIUC, it
is not a real cache like the "tx skb cache" patch, and kind of a
delayed freeing.
Thanks,
Feng