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 3DB59C4321E for ; Tue, 18 Oct 2022 02:50:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230198AbiJRCuH (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2022 22:50:07 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:53194 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229949AbiJRCuD (ORCPT ); Mon, 17 Oct 2022 22:50:03 -0400 Received: from mail-pl1-x629.google.com (mail-pl1-x629.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::629]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 332E639B95; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 19:49:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pl1-x629.google.com with SMTP id c24so12537271pls.9; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 19:49:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=MYWDNHPcGSdBQ0TtCNfLbSU+DkA9tEuGDYIVvPAI7/0=; b=S644mYldkDdn9IzogmrtxPMghIHrRnYMwInUFSkWmIfIV6u5cT5zDrzmrXP9yXo7dE RW0Ve/cxIWCwnv/chDNanT6+qidZGMSdTjz58MD1+sPu2wfHDyKuA8aKkh4MhpwWgg2g 1XbmqYyrckRGQq1PCvfutsF43+BQaJi9bebuOVXFQsFB++cM5yYMJKpVdn6FoN1G9NSL 59780SnjTOu6VZ1Wr8YBr6GGvwDXlrOLZ67N6pa7XybsVZNTWxZZXsWlFrpGeBpGI1Nz hJqdVGQCcWN06UOlhDahBxTAHs8Q6vqstdu4SRVObuFqU8kq1AIChAwTEHJpzg0Ud6ff 8SXg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=MYWDNHPcGSdBQ0TtCNfLbSU+DkA9tEuGDYIVvPAI7/0=; b=sCTmv59JKd+jddnJUKwKQ9OZpPfUcpcyOqQw31+N/cc7ckUxRiGOvxcMsKePrhXgzi DcaXdx4P9N1OMgfyCJeE4ieQ292D5eNIM5i9zZxBbqR1CChU8shJQ+hWrSZ176VLyz7j +hujGFTCNBhUb0NGb9fwynXX1jQYMeS+gmnCGS9lmg9cx8vvohFeSOD20EW9Hgth21qG GSzoR6QUvzgkajO5/BA5Amu8hBs/80gETzgIDMABP3WRs1lRBK8GqDx9XdswxhKS43kx 7a+5lW9cO5B0K5u+RCb46Rnh1WuLOuCjTyMh2wTl1CbhZotCJBGAt+ntxu1TCtBQJK1o mLfQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ACrzQf1fRuUhQ8XgioK3av7DylLGrX/cQ5du1zs2XvZAcMi9BnR6FL7X KgiMb6eZhYW1S4BbwW1wuek6eCjv8+nQOjFa X-Google-Smtp-Source: AMsMyM4ZMpYISHTX0CfUx5VRSORVl3Y3s0KqqFAEcuJ9LVkZMBd1zeNk4ESkh1fJ07etLJLfq0r5BQ== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:d2cf:b0:185:4bbd:1970 with SMTP id n15-20020a170902d2cf00b001854bbd1970mr854860plc.88.1666061393807; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 19:49:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (ec2-52-52-7-82.us-west-1.compute.amazonaws.com. [52.52.7.82]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u5-20020a170902714500b00178323e689fsm7287963plm.171.2022.10.17.19.49.52 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 17 Oct 2022 19:49:53 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2022 21:55:55 +0000 From: Bobby Eshleman To: Cong Wang Cc: Stefano Garzarella , "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Bobby Eshleman , Bobby Eshleman , Cong Wang , Jiang Wang , Stefan Hajnoczi , Jason Wang , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , kvm@vger.kernel.org, virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] vsock: replace virtio_vsock_pkt with sk_buff Message-ID: References: <20221006011946.85130-1-bobby.eshleman@bytedance.com> <20221006025956-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org> <20221006073410.ahhqhlhah4lo47o7@sgarzare-redhat> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Oct 15, 2022 at 12:49:59PM -0700, Cong Wang wrote: > On Mon, Oct 03, 2022 at 12:11:39AM +0000, Bobby Eshleman wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 09:34:10AM +0200, Stefano Garzarella wrote: > > > On Thu, Oct 06, 2022 at 03:08:12AM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > On Wed, Oct 05, 2022 at 06:19:44PM -0700, Bobby Eshleman wrote: > > > > > This patch replaces the struct virtio_vsock_pkt with struct sk_buff. > > > > > > > > > > Using sk_buff in vsock benefits it by a) allowing vsock to be extended > > > > > for socket-related features like sockmap, b) vsock may in the future > > > > > use other sk_buff-dependent kernel capabilities, and c) vsock shares > > > > > commonality with other socket types. > > > > > > > > > > This patch is taken from the original series found here: > > > > > https://lore.kernel.org/all/cover.1660362668.git.bobby.eshleman@bytedance.com/ > > > > > > > > > > Small-sized packet throughput improved by ~5% (from 18.53 Mb/s to 19.51 > > > > > Mb/s). Tested using uperf, 16B payloads, 64 threads, 100s, averaged from > > > > > 10 test runs (n=10). This improvement is likely due to packet merging. > > > > > > > > > > Large-sized packet throughput decreases ~9% (from 27.25 Gb/s to 25.04 > > > > > Gb/s). Tested using uperf, 64KB payloads, 64 threads, 100s, averaged > > > > > from 10 test runs (n=10). > > > > > > > > > > Medium-sized packet throughput decreases ~5% (from 4.0 Gb/s to 3.81 > > > > > Gb/s). Tested using uperf, 4k to 8k payload sizes picked randomly > > > > > according to normal distribution, 64 threads, 100s, averaged from 10 > > > > > test runs (n=10). > > > > > > > > It is surprizing to me that the original vsock code managed to outperform > > > > the new one, given that to my knowledge we did not focus on optimizing it. > > > > > > Yeah mee to. > > > > > > > Indeed. > > > > > From this numbers maybe the allocation cost has been reduced as it performs > > > better with small packets. But with medium to large packets we perform > > > worse, perhaps because previously we were allocating a contiguous buffer up > > > to 64k? > > > Instead alloc_skb() could allocate non-contiguous pages ? (which would solve > > > the problems we saw a few days ago) > > > > > > > I think this would be the case with alloc_skb_with_frags(), but > > internally alloc_skb() uses kmalloc() for the payload and sk_buff_head > > slab allocations for the sk_buff itself (all the more confusing to me, > > as the prior allocator also uses two separate allocations per packet). > > I think it is related to your implementation of > virtio_transport_add_to_queue(), where you introduced much more > complicated logic than before: > > - spin_lock_bh(&vsock->send_pkt_list_lock); > - list_add_tail(&pkt->list, &vsock->send_pkt_list); > - spin_unlock_bh(&vsock->send_pkt_list_lock); > - > + virtio_transport_add_to_queue(&vsock->send_pkt_queue, skb); > I wish it were that easy, but I included this change because it actually boosts performance. For 16B payloads, this change improves throughput from 16 Mb/s to 20Mb/s in my test harness, and reduces the memory usage of the kmalloc-512 and skbuff_head_cache slab caches by ~50MB at cache size peak (total slab cache size from ~540MB to ~390MB), but typically (not at peak) the slab cache size when this merging is used keeps the memory slab caches closer to ~150MB smaller. Tests done using uperf. For payloads greater than GOOD_COPY_LEN I don't see any any notable difference between the skb code with merging and the skb code without merging in terms of throughput. I assume this is because the skb->len comparison with GOOD_COPY_LEN should short circuit the expression and the other memory operations should not occur. > A simple list_add_tail() is definitely faster than your > virtio_transport_skbs_can_merge() check. So, why do you have to merge > skb while we don't merge virtio_vsock_pkt? > sk_buff is over twice the size of virtio_vsock_pkt (96B vs 232B). It seems wise to reduce the footprint in other ways to try and keep it comparable. > _If_ you are trying to mimic TCP, I think you are doing it wrong, it can > be much more efficient if you could do the merge in sendmsg() before skb > is even allocated, see tcp_sendmsg_locked(). I'll definitely give it a read, merging before allocating an skb sounds better. Best, Bobby