Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Rick Jones
Date: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 - 3:19 pm

Andi Kleen wrote:

All depends on what the user provides with the test-specific -m option for how 
much data they shove into the socket each time "send" is called, and I suppose if 
they use a test-specific -D option to set TCP_NODELAY in the case of a TCP test 
when they have small values of -m.  Eg

netperf -t TCP_STREAM ... -- -m 64K
vs
netperf -t TCP_STREAM ... -- -m 1024
vs
netperf -t TCP_STREAM ... -- -m 1024 -D
vs
netperf -t UDP_STREAM ... -- -m 1024

etc etc.

If the netperf test is:

netperf -t TCP_RR ... -- -r 1   (single-byte request/response)

then TSO/GSO/USO won't matter at all, and probably still wont matter even if the 
user has ./configure'd netperf with --enable-burst and does:

netperf -t TCP_RR ... -- -r 1 -b 64
or
netperf -t TCP_RR ... -- -r 1 -b 64 -D

which was basically what I was doing for the 32-core scaling stuff I posted about 
a few weeks ago.  That was running on multi-queue NICs, so looking at some of the 
profiles of the "no iptables" data may help show how big/small the problem is, 
keeping in mind that my runs (either the XFrame II runs, or the Chelsio T3C runs 
before them) had one queue per core in the system...and as such may be a best 
case scenario as far as lock contention on a per-queue basis goes.

ftp://ftp.netperf.org/

happy benchmarking,

rick jones

BTW, that setup went "poof" and had to go to other nefarious porpoises.  I'm not 
sure when I can recreate it, but I still have both the XFrame and T3C NICs when 
the HW comes free again.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Vernon Mauery, (Wed Mar 18, 10:24 am)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Eric Dumazet, (Wed Mar 18, 12:07 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Vernon Mauery, (Wed Mar 18, 1:17 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Andi Kleen, (Wed Mar 18, 1:54 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, David Miller, (Wed Mar 18, 2:03 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Vernon Mauery, (Wed Mar 18, 2:07 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Vernon Mauery, (Wed Mar 18, 2:10 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, David Miller, (Wed Mar 18, 2:38 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Eilon Greenstein, (Wed Mar 18, 2:45 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Vernon Mauery, (Wed Mar 18, 2:49 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Vernon Mauery, (Wed Mar 18, 2:51 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Gregory Haskins, (Wed Mar 18, 2:54 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Andi Kleen, (Wed Mar 18, 2:59 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Rick Jones, (Wed Mar 18, 3:19 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, David Miller, (Wed Mar 18, 6:02 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, David Miller, (Wed Mar 18, 6:03 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Sven-Thorsten Dietrich, (Wed Mar 18, 6:13 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Gregory Haskins, (Wed Mar 18, 8:48 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, David Miller, (Wed Mar 18, 10:38 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Evgeniy Polyakov, (Thu Mar 19, 12:15 am)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Gregory Haskins, (Thu Mar 19, 5:42 am)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Peter W. Morreale, (Thu Mar 19, 5:50 am)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Peter W. Morreale, (Thu Mar 19, 5:59 am)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Peter W. Morreale, (Thu Mar 19, 6:36 am)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Andi Kleen, (Thu Mar 19, 6:46 am)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, David Miller, (Thu Mar 19, 1:52 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Jarek Poplawski, (Fri Mar 20, 4:29 pm)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Eric Dumazet, (Mon Mar 23, 1:32 am)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, David Miller, (Mon Mar 23, 1:37 am)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Jarek Poplawski, (Mon Mar 23, 1:50 am)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Herbert Xu, (Thu Apr 2, 7:13 am)
Re: High contention on the sk_buff_head.lock, Herbert Xu, (Thu Apr 2, 7:15 am)