From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mahesh Bandewar Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] bonding: Add tlb_dynamic_lb module parameter Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:47:27 -0700 Message-ID: References: <1396070949-17783-1-git-send-email-maheshb@google.com> <1396281602.29410.44.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Jay Vosburgh , Veaceslav Falico , Andy Gospodarek , David Miller , netdev , Eric Dumazet , Maciej Zenczykowski To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from mail-vc0-f181.google.com ([209.85.220.181]:36739 "EHLO mail-vc0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751004AbaCaVrs (ORCPT ); Mon, 31 Mar 2014 17:47:48 -0400 Received: by mail-vc0-f181.google.com with SMTP id id10so8650384vcb.40 for ; Mon, 31 Mar 2014 14:47:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1396281602.29410.44.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Mar 31, 2014 at 9:00 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > On Fri, 2014-03-28 at 22:29 -0700, Mahesh Bandewar wrote: > > The aggresive load balancing causes packet re-ordering as active > > flows are moved from a slave to another within the group. Sometime > > this aggresive lb is not necessary if the preference is for less > > re-ordering. This module parameter if used with value "0" disables > > this dynamic flow shuffling minimizing packet re-ordering. Of course > > the side effect is that it has to live with the static load balancing > > that the hashing distribution provides. This impact is less severe if > > the correct xmit-hashing-policy is used for the tlb setup. > > > > The default value of the parameter is set to "1" mimicing the earlier > > behavior. > > > > Ran the netperf test with 200 stream for 1 min between two hosts with > > 4x1G trunk (xmit-lb mode with xmit-policy L3+4) before and after these > > changes. Following was the command used for those 200 instances - > > > > netperf -t TCP_RR -l 60 -s 5 -H -- -r1,1024 > > There is reordering potential in this workload, as we have at most one > packet containing payload in flight ? > I'll run the numbers again with a different work-load like -r80k,80k and append it to the commit msg. > > > > Transactions per second: > > Before changes: 109250 > > After changes: 113752 > > > > Signed-off-by: Mahesh Bandewar > > --- > > > "each slaves peer switch. The default is 1."); > > +module_param(tlb_dynamic_lb, int, 0644); > > +MODULE_PARM_DESC(tlb_dynamic_lb, "Enable periodic flow balancing. " > > + "The default is 1."); > > I am a bit unsure why we need to add a new global parameter. > > If the tlb_dynamic_lb can be dynamically changed on a bonding device, > why adding this ? > I was trying to be in sync with most of the values currently set. Also thinking behind this was to set the initial value through the module parameter and the per-bond value can be altered if needed using the per-device entry.