From: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org>
To: Matteo Croce <mcroce@redhat.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>,
Maxime Chevallier <maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com>,
Antoine Tenart <antoine.tenart@bootlin.com>,
Luka Perkov <luka.perkov@sartura.hr>,
Tomislav Tomasic <tomislav.tomasic@sartura.hr>,
Marcin Wojtas <mw@semihalf.com>,
Stefan Chulski <stefanc@marvell.com>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>,
Nadav Haklai <nadavh@marvell.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 0/2] mvpp2: page_pool support
Date: Tue, 24 Dec 2019 11:52:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191224095229.GA24310@apalos.home> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191224010103.56407-1-mcroce@redhat.com>
On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 02:01:01AM +0100, Matteo Croce wrote:
> This patches change the memory allocator of mvpp2 from the frag allocator to
> the page_pool API. This change is needed to add later XDP support to mvpp2.
>
> The reason I send it as RFC is that with this changeset, mvpp2 performs much
> more slower. This is the tc drop rate measured with a single flow:
>
> stock net-next with frag allocator:
> rx: 900.7 Mbps 1877 Kpps
>
> this patchset with page_pool:
> rx: 423.5 Mbps 882.3 Kpps
>
> This is the perf top when receiving traffic:
>
> 27.68% [kernel] [k] __page_pool_clean_page
This seems extremly high on the list.
> 9.79% [kernel] [k] get_page_from_freelist
> 7.18% [kernel] [k] free_unref_page
> 4.64% [kernel] [k] build_skb
> 4.63% [kernel] [k] __netif_receive_skb_core
> 3.83% [mvpp2] [k] mvpp2_poll
> 3.64% [kernel] [k] eth_type_trans
> 3.61% [kernel] [k] kmem_cache_free
> 3.03% [kernel] [k] kmem_cache_alloc
> 2.76% [kernel] [k] dev_gro_receive
> 2.69% [mvpp2] [k] mvpp2_bm_pool_put
> 2.68% [kernel] [k] page_frag_free
> 1.83% [kernel] [k] inet_gro_receive
> 1.74% [kernel] [k] page_pool_alloc_pages
> 1.70% [kernel] [k] __build_skb
> 1.47% [kernel] [k] __alloc_pages_nodemask
> 1.36% [mvpp2] [k] mvpp2_buf_alloc.isra.0
> 1.29% [kernel] [k] tcf_action_exec
>
> I tried Ilias patches for page_pool recycling, I get an improvement
> to ~1100, but I'm still far than the original allocator.
Can you post the recycling perf for comparison?
>
> Any idea on why I get such bad numbers?
Nop but it's indeed strange
>
> Another reason to send it as RFC is that I'm not fully convinced on how to
> use the page_pool given the HW limitation of the BM.
I'll have a look right after holidays
>
> The driver currently uses, for every CPU, a page_pool for short packets and
> another for long ones. The driver also has 4 rx queue per port, so every
> RXQ #1 will share the short and long page pools of CPU #1.
>
I am not sure i am following the hardware config here
> This means that for every RX queue I call xdp_rxq_info_reg_mem_model() twice,
> on two different page_pool, can this be a problem?
>
> As usual, ideas are welcome.
>
> Matteo Croce (2):
> mvpp2: use page_pool allocator
> mvpp2: memory accounting
>
> drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/Kconfig | 1 +
> drivers/net/ethernet/marvell/mvpp2/mvpp2.h | 7 +
> .../net/ethernet/marvell/mvpp2/mvpp2_main.c | 142 +++++++++++++++---
> 3 files changed, 125 insertions(+), 25 deletions(-)
>
> --
> 2.24.1
>
Cheers
/Ilias
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-24 9:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-24 1:01 [RFC net-next 0/2] mvpp2: page_pool support Matteo Croce
2019-12-24 1:01 ` [RFC net-next 1/2] mvpp2: use page_pool allocator Matteo Croce
2019-12-24 1:01 ` [RFC net-next 2/2] mvpp2: memory accounting Matteo Croce
2019-12-24 9:52 ` Ilias Apalodimas [this message]
2019-12-24 13:34 ` [RFC net-next 0/2] mvpp2: page_pool support Matteo Croce
2019-12-24 14:04 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2019-12-24 14:00 ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2019-12-24 14:37 ` Matteo Croce
2019-12-27 11:51 ` Ilias Apalodimas
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=20191224095229.GA24310@apalos.home \
--to=ilias.apalodimas@linaro.org \
--cc=antoine.tenart@bootlin.com \
--cc=brouer@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=lorenzo@kernel.org \
--cc=luka.perkov@sartura.hr \
--cc=maxime.chevallier@bootlin.com \
--cc=mcroce@redhat.com \
--cc=mw@semihalf.com \
--cc=nadavh@marvell.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stefanc@marvell.com \
--cc=tomislav.tomasic@sartura.hr \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).