From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: rm@romanrm.net Received: from krantz.zx2c4.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id fa4f1a7a for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 15:50:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from rin.romanrm.net (rin.romanrm.net [91.121.86.59]) by krantz.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id a0e8516b for ; Tue, 10 Jul 2018 15:50:09 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2018 20:57:29 +0500 From: Roman Mamedov To: "Jason A. Donenfeld" Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] WireGuard Snapshot `0.0.20180708` Available Message-ID: <20180710205729.645bc734@natsu> In-Reply-To: References: <20180710195436.357fb972@natsu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Cc: WireGuard mailing list List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 16:57:14 +0200 "Jason A. Donenfeld" wrote: > The latest snapshot will still have the same preemption relaxation > with simd_relax(), but gets performance gains by moving to napi, so > it's still faster overall. If you want the simd_relax() to not take a > hit and get maximum throughput, the right way of doing this is > actually to just disable preemption in your kernel with > PREEMPT_NONE=y. I build a single kernel to use across a diverse park of machines, including servers, routers -- and a few GUI desktops. It is not an option for me to disable preemption entirely in that kernel. (And it would be a hassle to build two or more kernels each time). However those of my hosts which are routers with WG, are NOT the same hosts which are interactive desktops. So I don't want any sacrifices towards interactivity *in WG*. I'll probably test again without simd_relax, but from the past mailing list discussion it seemed like that one doesn't affect things much. In any case, it's great that you found a way to keep performance and increase interactivity at the same time with NAPI. -- With respect, Roman