All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
To: "Toke Høiland-Jørgensen" <toke@redhat.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
	Toshiaki Makita <toshiaki.makita1@gmail.com>,
	Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/4] veth: refine napi usage
Date: Fri, 09 Apr 2021 17:07:49 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <f40fd90aa5077896121b368027fa8c70e505a358.camel@redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87y2drtsic.fsf@toke.dk>

hello,

On Fri, 2021-04-09 at 16:57 +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com> writes:
> 
> > After the previous patch, when enabling GRO, locally generated
> > TCP traffic experiences some measurable overhead, as it traverses
> > the GRO engine without any chance of aggregation.
> > 
> > This change refine the NAPI receive path admission test, to avoid
> > unnecessary GRO overhead in most scenarios, when GRO is enabled
> > on a veth peer.
> > 
> > Only skbs that are eligible for aggregation enter the GRO layer,
> > the others will go through the traditional receive path.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/net/veth.c | 23 ++++++++++++++++++++++-
> >  1 file changed, 22 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/veth.c b/drivers/net/veth.c
> > index ca44e82d1edeb..85f90f33d437e 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/veth.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/veth.c
> > @@ -282,6 +282,25 @@ static int veth_forward_skb(struct net_device *dev, struct sk_buff *skb,
> >  		netif_rx(skb);
> >  }
> >  
> > +/* return true if the specified skb has chances of GRO aggregation
> > + * Don't strive for accuracy, but try to avoid GRO overhead in the most
> > + * common scenarios.
> > + * When XDP is enabled, all traffic is considered eligible, as the xmit
> > + * device has TSO off.
> > + * When TSO is enabled on the xmit device, we are likely interested only
> > + * in UDP aggregation, explicitly check for that if the skb is suspected
> > + * - the sock_wfree destructor is used by UDP, ICMP and XDP sockets -
> > + * to belong to locally generated UDP traffic.
> > + */
> > +static bool veth_skb_is_eligible_for_gro(const struct net_device *dev,
> > +					 const struct net_device *rcv,
> > +					 const struct sk_buff *skb)
> > +{
> > +	return !(dev->features & NETIF_F_ALL_TSO) ||
> > +		(skb->destructor == sock_wfree &&
> > +		 rcv->features & (NETIF_F_GRO_FRAGLIST | NETIF_F_GRO_UDP_FWD));
> > +}
> > +
> >  static netdev_tx_t veth_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
> >  {
> >  	struct veth_priv *rcv_priv, *priv = netdev_priv(dev);
> > @@ -305,8 +324,10 @@ static netdev_tx_t veth_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
> >  
> >  		/* The napi pointer is available when an XDP program is
> >  		 * attached or when GRO is enabled
> > +		 * Don't bother with napi/GRO if the skb can't be aggregated
> >  		 */
> > -		use_napi = rcu_access_pointer(rq->napi);
> > +		use_napi = rcu_access_pointer(rq->napi) &&
> > +			   veth_skb_is_eligible_for_gro(dev, rcv, skb);
> >  		skb_record_rx_queue(skb, rxq);
> >  	}
> 
> You just changed the 'xdp_rcv' check to this use_napi, and now you're
> conditioning it on GRO eligibility, so doesn't this break XDP if that
> was the reason NAPI was turned on in the first place?

Thank you for the feedback.

If XDP is enabled, TSO is forced of on 'dev'
and veth_skb_is_eligible_for_gro() returns true, so napi/GRO is always
used - there is no functional change when XDP is enabled.

Please let me know if the above is more clear, thanks!

Paolo


  reply	other threads:[~2021-04-09 15:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-04-09 11:04 [PATCH net-next 0/4] veth: allow GRO even without XDP Paolo Abeni
2021-04-09 11:04 ` [PATCH net-next 1/4] veth: use skb_orphan_partial instead of skb_orphan Paolo Abeni
2021-04-09 11:04 ` [PATCH net-next 2/4] veth: allow enabling NAPI even without XDP Paolo Abeni
2021-04-09 14:58   ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-04-09 15:20     ` Paolo Abeni
2021-04-16 15:29       ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-04-16 17:26         ` Paolo Abeni
2021-04-16 18:19           ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-04-09 11:04 ` [PATCH net-next 3/4] veth: refine napi usage Paolo Abeni
2021-04-09 14:57   ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-04-09 15:07     ` Paolo Abeni [this message]
2021-04-09 15:18       ` Toke Høiland-Jørgensen
2021-04-09 11:04 ` [PATCH net-next 4/4] self-tests: add veth tests Paolo Abeni
2021-04-12  0:10 ` [PATCH net-next 0/4] veth: allow GRO even without XDP patchwork-bot+netdevbpf

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=f40fd90aa5077896121b368027fa8c70e505a358.camel@redhat.com \
    --to=pabeni@redhat.com \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=lorenzo@kernel.org \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=toke@redhat.com \
    --cc=toshiaki.makita1@gmail.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.