From: sdf@google.com
To: Song Liu <song@kernel.org>
Cc: Networking <netdev@vger.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@vger.kernel.org>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: try to avoid kzalloc in cgroup/{s,g}etsockopt
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2020 18:11:32 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <X+FV1EETHu9nO+kp@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPhsuW6KPF6J9Q6P-g6LQGBjwP_cGdM+VPGgYfOZ8pTkwShqaQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 12/21, Song Liu wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2020 at 9:24 AM Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com> wrote:
> >
> > When we attach a bpf program to cgroup/getsockopt any other getsockopt()
> > syscall starts incurring kzalloc/kfree cost. While, in general, it's
> > not an issue, sometimes it is, like in the case of TCP_ZEROCOPY_RECEIVE.
> > TCP_ZEROCOPY_RECEIVE (ab)uses getsockopt system call to implement
> > fastpath for incoming TCP, we don't want to have extra allocations in
> > there.
> >
> > Let add a small buffer on the stack and use it for small (majority)
> > {s,g}etsockopt values. I've started with 128 bytes to cover
> > the options we care about (TCP_ZEROCOPY_RECEIVE which is 32 bytes
> > currently, with some planned extension to 64 + some headroom
> > for the future).
> >
> > It seems natural to do the same for setsockopt, but it's a bit more
> > involved when the BPF program modifies the data (where we have to
> > kmalloc). The assumption is that for the majority of setsockopt
> > calls (which are doing pure BPF options or apply policy) this
> > will bring some benefit as well.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@google.com>
> Could you please share some performance numbers for this optimization?
We've found out about this problem by looking at our global google
profiler, where TCP_ZEROCOPY_RECEIVE was showing up higher than usual.
So I don't really have a nice reproducer, but I would assume I can try
to run something like tools/testing/selftests/net/tcp_mmap.c under perf
and see if there is a clear difference.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-22 2:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-17 17:23 [PATCH bpf-next 0/2] bpf: misc performance improvements for cgroup hooks Stanislav Fomichev
2020-12-17 17:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next 1/2] bpf: try to avoid kzalloc in cgroup/{s,g}etsockopt Stanislav Fomichev
2020-12-21 22:22 ` Song Liu
2020-12-22 2:09 ` sdf
2020-12-31 6:47 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2020-12-31 20:14 ` sdf
2021-01-04 21:01 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2020-12-21 22:25 ` Song Liu
2020-12-22 2:11 ` sdf [this message]
2020-12-22 19:11 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2020-12-23 3:09 ` sdf
2020-12-31 6:50 ` Martin KaFai Lau
2020-12-31 20:18 ` sdf
2020-12-17 17:23 ` [PATCH bpf-next 2/2] bpf: split cgroup_bpf_enabled per attach type Stanislav Fomichev
2020-12-21 22:40 ` Song Liu
2020-12-22 1:57 ` sdf
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=X+FV1EETHu9nO+kp@google.com \
--to=sdf@google.com \
--cc=ast@kernel.org \
--cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=song@kernel.org \
/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).