From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
To: "Samudrala, Sridhar" <sridhar.samudrala@intel.com>
Cc: "Karlsson, Magnus" <magnus.karlsson@intel.com>,
"Björn Töpel" <bjorn.topel@intel.com>,
Netdev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"bpf@vger.kernel.org" <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>,
"Fijalkowski, Maciej" <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>,
"Herbert, Tom" <tom.herbert@intel.com>
Subject: Re: FW: [PATCH bpf-next 2/4] xsk: allow AF_XDP sockets to receive packets directly from a queue
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 18:06:53 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAADnVQ+CH1YM52+LfybLS+NK16414Exrvk1QpYOF=HaT4KRaxg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2032d58c-916f-d26a-db14-bd5ba6ad92b9@intel.com>
On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 12:12 PM Samudrala, Sridhar
<sridhar.samudrala@intel.com> wrote:
> >> 34.57% xdpsock xdpsock [.] main
> >> 17.19% ksoftirqd/1 [kernel.vmlinux] [k] ___bpf_prog_run
> >> 13.12% xdpsock [kernel.vmlinux] [k] ___bpf_prog_run
> >
> > That must be a bad joke.
> > The whole patch set is based on comparing native code to interpreter?!
> > It's pretty awesome that interpreter is only 1.5x slower than native x86.
> > Just turn the JIT on.
>
> Thanks Alexei for pointing out that i didn't have JIT on.
> When i turn it on, the performance improvement is a more modest 1.5x
> with rxdrop and 1.2x with l2fwd.
I want to see perf reports back to back with proper performance analysis.
> >
> > Obvious Nack to the patch set.
> >
>
> Will update the patchset with the right performance data and address
> feedback from Bjorn.
> Hope you are not totally against direct XDP approach as it does provide
> value when an AF_XDP socket is bound to a queue and a HW filter can
> direct packets targeted for that queue.
I used to be in favor of providing "prog bypass" for af_xdp,
because of anecdotal evidence that it will make af_xdp faster.
Now seeing the numbers and the way they were collected
I'm against such bypass.
I want to see hard proof that trivial bpf prog is actually slowing things down
before reviewing any new patch sets.
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org
Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] FW: [PATCH bpf-next 2/4] xsk: allow AF_XDP sockets to receive packets directly from a queue
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2019 18:06:53 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAADnVQ+CH1YM52+LfybLS+NK16414Exrvk1QpYOF=HaT4KRaxg@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <2032d58c-916f-d26a-db14-bd5ba6ad92b9@intel.com>
On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 12:12 PM Samudrala, Sridhar
<sridhar.samudrala@intel.com> wrote:
> >> 34.57% xdpsock xdpsock [.] main
> >> 17.19% ksoftirqd/1 [kernel.vmlinux] [k] ___bpf_prog_run
> >> 13.12% xdpsock [kernel.vmlinux] [k] ___bpf_prog_run
> >
> > That must be a bad joke.
> > The whole patch set is based on comparing native code to interpreter?!
> > It's pretty awesome that interpreter is only 1.5x slower than native x86.
> > Just turn the JIT on.
>
> Thanks Alexei for pointing out that i didn't have JIT on.
> When i turn it on, the performance improvement is a more modest 1.5x
> with rxdrop and 1.2x with l2fwd.
I want to see perf reports back to back with proper performance analysis.
> >
> > Obvious Nack to the patch set.
> >
>
> Will update the patchset with the right performance data and address
> feedback from Bjorn.
> Hope you are not totally against direct XDP approach as it does provide
> value when an AF_XDP socket is bound to a queue and a HW filter can
> direct packets targeted for that queue.
I used to be in favor of providing "prog bypass" for af_xdp,
because of anecdotal evidence that it will make af_xdp faster.
Now seeing the numbers and the way they were collected
I'm against such bypass.
I want to see hard proof that trivial bpf prog is actually slowing things down
before reviewing any new patch sets.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-10 1:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 84+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-08 6:16 [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] Enable direct receive on AF_XDP sockets Sridhar Samudrala
2019-10-08 6:16 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Sridhar Samudrala
2019-10-08 6:16 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/4] bpf: introduce bpf_get_prog_id and bpf_set_prog_id helper functions Sridhar Samudrala
2019-10-08 6:16 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Sridhar Samudrala
2019-10-08 6:16 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/4] xsk: allow AF_XDP sockets to receive packets directly from a queue Sridhar Samudrala
2019-10-08 6:16 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Sridhar Samudrala
2019-10-08 6:58 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-10-08 6:58 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Toke =?unknown-8bit?q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?=
2019-10-08 8:47 ` Björn Töpel
2019-10-08 8:47 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " =?unknown-8bit?q?Bj=C3=B6rn_T=C3=B6pel?=
2019-10-08 8:48 ` Björn Töpel
2019-10-08 8:48 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " =?unknown-8bit?q?Bj=C3=B6rn_T=C3=B6pel?=
2019-10-08 9:04 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-10-08 9:04 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Toke =?unknown-8bit?q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?=
2019-10-08 8:05 ` Björn Töpel
2019-10-08 8:05 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " =?unknown-8bit?q?Bj=C3=B6rn_T=C3=B6pel?=
2019-10-09 16:32 ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-09 16:32 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-09 1:20 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-10-09 1:20 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexei Starovoitov
[not found] ` <3ED8E928C4210A4289A677D2FEB48235140134CE@fmsmsx111.amr.corp.intel.com>
2019-10-09 16:53 ` FW: " Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-09 16:53 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-09 17:17 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-10-09 17:17 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexei Starovoitov
2019-10-09 19:12 ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-09 19:12 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-10 1:06 ` Alexei Starovoitov [this message]
2019-10-10 1:06 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-10-18 18:40 ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-18 18:40 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-18 19:22 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-10-18 19:22 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Toke =?unknown-8bit?q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?=
2019-10-19 0:14 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-10-19 0:14 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexei Starovoitov
2019-10-19 0:45 ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-19 0:45 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-19 2:25 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-10-19 2:25 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Alexei Starovoitov
2019-10-20 10:14 ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2019-10-20 10:14 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Toke =?unknown-8bit?q?H=C3=B8iland-J=C3=B8rgensen?=
2019-10-20 17:12 ` Björn Töpel
2019-10-20 17:12 ` =?unknown-8bit?q?Bj=C3=B6rn_T=C3=B6pel?=
2019-10-21 20:10 ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-21 20:10 ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-21 22:34 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-10-21 22:34 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-10-22 19:06 ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-22 19:06 ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-23 17:42 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-10-23 17:42 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-10-24 18:12 ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-24 18:12 ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-25 7:42 ` Björn Töpel
2019-10-25 7:42 ` =?unknown-8bit?q?Bj=C3=B6rn_T=C3=B6pel?=
2019-10-31 22:38 ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-31 22:38 ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-31 23:15 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-10-31 23:15 ` Alexei Starovoitov
2019-11-01 0:21 ` Jakub Kicinski
2019-11-01 0:21 ` Jakub Kicinski
2019-11-01 18:31 ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-11-01 18:31 ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-11-04 2:08 ` dan
2019-11-04 2:08 ` dan
2019-10-25 9:07 ` Björn Töpel
2019-10-25 9:07 ` =?unknown-8bit?q?Bj=C3=B6rn_T=C3=B6pel?=
2019-10-08 6:16 ` [PATCH bpf-next 3/4] libbpf: handle AF_XDP sockets created with XDP_DIRECT bind flag Sridhar Samudrala
2019-10-08 6:16 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Sridhar Samudrala
2019-10-08 8:05 ` Björn Töpel
2019-10-08 8:05 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " =?unknown-8bit?q?Bj=C3=B6rn_T=C3=B6pel?=
2019-10-08 6:16 ` [PATCH bpf-next 4/4] xdpsock: add an option to create AF_XDP sockets in XDP_DIRECT mode Sridhar Samudrala
2019-10-08 6:16 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Sridhar Samudrala
2019-10-08 8:05 ` Björn Töpel
2019-10-08 8:05 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " =?unknown-8bit?q?Bj=C3=B6rn_T=C3=B6pel?=
2019-10-08 8:05 ` [PATCH bpf-next 0/4] Enable direct receive on AF_XDP sockets Björn Töpel
2019-10-08 8:05 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " =?unknown-8bit?q?Bj=C3=B6rn_T=C3=B6pel?=
2019-10-09 16:19 ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-09 16:19 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-09 0:49 ` Jakub Kicinski
2019-10-09 0:49 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Kicinski
2019-10-09 6:29 ` Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-09 6:29 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Samudrala, Sridhar
2019-10-09 16:53 ` Jakub Kicinski
2019-10-09 16:53 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jakub Kicinski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAADnVQ+CH1YM52+LfybLS+NK16414Exrvk1QpYOF=HaT4KRaxg@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com \
--cc=bjorn.topel@intel.com \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
--cc=maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com \
--cc=magnus.karlsson@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=sridhar.samudrala@intel.com \
--cc=tom.herbert@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.