From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7369C678D5 for ; Fri, 24 Feb 2023 14:47:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230085AbjBXOrx (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Feb 2023 09:47:53 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:37672 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229497AbjBXOru (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Feb 2023 09:47:50 -0500 Received: from mail-yw1-x112f.google.com (mail-yw1-x112f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::112f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A381D19BA; Fri, 24 Feb 2023 06:47:48 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-yw1-x112f.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-536bf92b55cso281764207b3.12; Fri, 24 Feb 2023 06:47:48 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:references :in-reply-to:message-id:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=8uUY0givXBFT5S7l+w54j/YXmi9by/XbIMZYftrzf2Q=; b=LLvWs8JX9DPLjP9GXeHGKYI6m3OLPWqDFxAE5Mr7DI3o9UqA5qKuhCWT6dCKs7RCBm /3+i988r17RH4J3MsFUBR5E9bXe5norCSlCV540ExT8ajXbus6eXIseyswopyjBVAfM1 pvEznqqmPijzJbWqm+DlAQA7uW7Yss/j4wNcHyo3Oq7YebMUTSI+qLYg8TqK1K9+LOjL VRhS4mjzYz8l6/Mcmqk7/XKHhidzty7L6aR3fNuhsrjdGNypedE5bO3kMUd8dUJLCzw9 zCQ1NeMO4Y5TKYNn/JjS+9xqWMWWqkLo2A5w/Aqr13ZWkNrF57QDU4n/1jux7P9YEalQ yiQA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:references :in-reply-to:message-id:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to :cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=8uUY0givXBFT5S7l+w54j/YXmi9by/XbIMZYftrzf2Q=; b=K6jSW3DJ1IvND3tPS0YjAwNZY/ye8USZhG2x1mz2DOVF+f8MqqpzH3/x2eAfKAyvyX JXr8N/yRq3FtCeHmP9SvY6M0xaFrhkDyf6/yA3a+YHSd8sHNKRGFVgSCyW4JviFAyjA3 p6GB6XDLUeg9xBAwOu9clCOB0sxtOxlnfFNiqSOExIMYxpcNFW1pipRFhkCiC6WII/75 mhFd2gDrumbehIodLBcUI2L1ijXwSxQaAeo6kwTAF8zdbuBUV2Q/MpkOwkwur00RjdDR 8EXUUWNTUTC1i0F3z578+AFvz4cwF2PJEGzEmlSGRV6mljYXBnbdbd9oS/AOeFF4QFy1 JLFg== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKXyldYiMG6Rj4f2r2ovjes60x3Yy8hhUaaoy0PrlFYLvXIuwVoW 3vQaP1WqWNKvWozj4a+gVnYiEYjsQXM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set/G9lKoX3cNTU4MKH/VN/w5BVWKXkwG3pEbF8XrYg8cCVVWQO24zeRWIYJB3yVJi0n7MdR0Og== X-Received: by 2002:a25:e210:0:b0:a24:1001:1fb2 with SMTP id h16-20020a25e210000000b00a2410011fb2mr6144946ybe.30.1677250067848; Fri, 24 Feb 2023 06:47:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (240.157.150.34.bc.googleusercontent.com. [34.150.157.240]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id b201-20020ae9ebd2000000b007423843d879sm5160106qkg.93.2023.02.24.06.47.47 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 24 Feb 2023 06:47:47 -0800 (PST) Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2023 09:47:47 -0500 From: Willem de Bruijn To: yang.yang29@zte.com.cn, davem@davemloft.net Cc: edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, shuah@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, zhang.yunkai@zte.com.cn, xu.xin16@zte.com.cn, jiang.xuexin@zte.com.cn Message-ID: <63f8ce1313457_78f63208c6@willemb.c.googlers.com.notmuch> In-Reply-To: <202302241438536013777@zte.com.cn> References: <202302241438536013777@zte.com.cn> Subject: RE: [PATCH linux-next] selftests: net: udpgso_bench_tx: Add test for IP fragmentation of UDP packets Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org yang.yang29@ wrote: > From: zhang yunkai (CGEL ZTE) > > The UDP GSO bench only tests the performance of userspace payload splitting > and UDP GSO. But we are also concerned about the performance comparing > with IP fragmentation and UDP GSO. In other words comparing IP fragmentation > and segmentation. > > So we add testcase of IP fragmentation of UDP packets, then user would easy > to get to know the performance promotion of UDP GSO compared with IP > fragmentation. We add a new option "-f", which is to send big data using > IP fragmentation instead of using UDP GSO or userspace payload splitting. > > In the QEMU environment we could see obvious promotion of UDP GSO. > The first test is to get the performance of userspace payload splitting. > bash# udpgso_bench_tx -l 4 -4 -D "$DST" > udp tx: 10 MB/s 7812 calls/s 186 msg/s > udp tx: 10 MB/s 7392 calls/s 176 msg/s > udp tx: 11 MB/s 7938 calls/s 189 msg/s > udp tx: 11 MB/s 7854 calls/s 187 msg/s > > The second test is to get the performance of IP fragmentation. > bash# udpgso_bench_tx -l 4 -4 -D "$DST" -f > udp tx: 33 MB/s 572 calls/s 572 msg/s > udp tx: 33 MB/s 563 calls/s 563 msg/s > udp tx: 31 MB/s 540 calls/s 540 msg/s > udp tx: 33 MB/s 571 calls/s 571 msg/s > > The third test is to get the performance of UDP GSO. > bash# udpgso_bench_tx -l 4 -4 -D "$DST" -S 0 > udp tx: 46 MB/s 795 calls/s 795 msg/s > udp tx: 49 MB/s 845 calls/s 845 msg/s > udp tx: 49 MB/s 847 calls/s 847 msg/s > udp tx: 45 MB/s 774 calls/s 774 msg/s > > Signed-off-by: zhang yunkai (CGEL ZTE) > Reviewed-by: xu xin (CGEL ZTE) > Reviewed-by: Yang Yang (CGEL ZTE) > Cc: Xuexin Jiang (CGEL ZTE) > --- > tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgso_bench_tx.c | 33 ++++++++++++++++++++++----- > 1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgso_bench_tx.c b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgso_bench_tx.c > index 477392715a9a..025e706b594b 100644 > --- a/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgso_bench_tx.c > +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/net/udpgso_bench_tx.c > @@ -64,6 +64,7 @@ static int cfg_runtime_ms = -1; > static bool cfg_poll; > static int cfg_poll_loop_timeout_ms = 2000; > static bool cfg_segment; > +static bool cfg_fragment; > static bool cfg_sendmmsg; > static bool cfg_tcp; > static uint32_t cfg_tx_ts = SOF_TIMESTAMPING_TX_SOFTWARE; > @@ -375,6 +376,21 @@ static int send_udp_sendmmsg(int fd, char *data) > return ret; > } > > +static int send_udp_fragment(int fd, char *data) > +{ > + int ret; > + > + ret = sendto(fd, data, cfg_payload_len, cfg_zerocopy ? MSG_ZEROCOPY : 0, > + cfg_connected ? NULL : (void *)&cfg_dst_addr, > + cfg_connected ? 0 : cfg_alen); This should probably disable PMTU discovery with IP_PMTUDISC_OMIT to allow transmission with fragmentation of a packet that exceeds MTU. And to avoid send returning with error after ICMP destination unreachable messages if MTU is exceeded in the path. > + if (ret == -1) > + error(1, errno, "write"); > + if (ret != cfg_payload_len) > + error(1, errno, "write: %uB != %uB\n", ret, cfg_payload_len); > + > + return 1; > +} > + > static void send_udp_segment_cmsg(struct cmsghdr *cm) > { > uint16_t *valp; > @@ -429,7 +445,7 @@ static int send_udp_segment(int fd, char *data) > > static void usage(const char *filepath) > { > - error(1, 0, "Usage: %s [-46acmHPtTuvz] [-C cpu] [-D dst ip] [-l secs] " > + error(1, 0, "Usage: %s [-46acfmHPtTuvz] [-C cpu] [-D dst ip] [-l secs] " > "[-L secs] [-M messagenr] [-p port] [-s sendsize] [-S gsosize]", > filepath); > } > @@ -440,7 +456,7 @@ static void parse_opts(int argc, char **argv) > int max_len, hdrlen; > int c; > > - while ((c = getopt(argc, argv, "46acC:D:Hl:L:mM:p:s:PS:tTuvz")) != -1) { > + while ((c = getopt(argc, argv, "46acC:D:fHl:L:mM:p:s:PS:tTuvz")) != -1) { > switch (c) { > case '4': > if (cfg_family != PF_UNSPEC) > @@ -469,6 +485,9 @@ static void parse_opts(int argc, char **argv) > case 'l': > cfg_runtime_ms = strtoul(optarg, NULL, 10) * 1000; > break; > + case 'f': > + cfg_fragment = true; > + break; > case 'L': > cfg_poll_loop_timeout_ms = strtoul(optarg, NULL, 10) * 1000; > break; > @@ -527,10 +546,10 @@ static void parse_opts(int argc, char **argv) > error(1, 0, "must pass one of -4 or -6"); > if (cfg_tcp && !cfg_connected) > error(1, 0, "connectionless tcp makes no sense"); > - if (cfg_segment && cfg_sendmmsg) > - error(1, 0, "cannot combine segment offload and sendmmsg"); > - if (cfg_tx_tstamp && !(cfg_segment || cfg_sendmmsg)) > - error(1, 0, "Options -T and -H require either -S or -m option"); > + if ((cfg_segment + cfg_sendmmsg + cfg_fragment) > 1) > + error(1, 0, "cannot combine segment offload , fragment and sendmmsg"); nit: extra whitespace before comma. > + if (cfg_tx_tstamp && !(cfg_segment || cfg_sendmmsg || cfg_fragment)) > + error(1, 0, "Options -T and -H require either -S or -m or -f option"); > > if (cfg_family == PF_INET) > hdrlen = sizeof(struct iphdr) + sizeof(struct udphdr); > @@ -695,6 +714,8 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv) > num_sends += send_udp_segment(fd, buf[i]); > else if (cfg_sendmmsg) > num_sends += send_udp_sendmmsg(fd, buf[i]); > + else if (cfg_fragment) > + num_sends += send_udp_fragment(fd, buf[i]); > else > num_sends += send_udp(fd, buf[i]); > num_msgs++; > -- > 2.15.2