[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH net-next v7 0/9] xen-netback: TX grant mapping with SKBTX_DEV_ZEROCOPY instead of copy
On 07/03/14 21:05, David Miller wrote: Well, thanks, I'm happy that things moving fast :), but I'm not sure it's good to apply a series before the maintainers ack it. As far as I've seen neither Wei nor Ian said the final word, and I guess Ian didn't had time to finish his review yet. There is an another series from Andrew Bennieston which was half-acked by Wei:From: Zoltan Kiss <zoltan.kiss@xxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2014 21:48:22 +0000A long known problem of the upstream netback implementation that on the TX path (from guest to Dom0) it copies the whole packet from guest memory into Dom0. That simply became a bottleneck with 10Gb NICs, and generally it's a huge perfomance penalty. The classic kernel version of netback used grant mapping, and to get notified when the page can be unmapped, it used page destructors. Unfortunately that destructor is not an upstreamable solution. Ian Campbell's skb fragment destructor patch series [1] tried to solve this problem, however it seems to be very invasive on the network stack's code, and therefore haven't progressed very well. This patch series use SKBTX_DEV_ZEROCOPY flags to tell the stack it needs to know when the skb is freed up. That is the way KVM solved the same problem, and based on my initial tests it can do the same for us. Avoiding the extra copy boosted up TX throughput from 6.8 Gbps to 7.9 (I used a slower AMD Interlagos box, both Dom0 and guest on upstream kernel, on the same NUMA node, running iperf 2.0.5, and the remote end was a bare metal box on the same 10Gb switch) Based on my investigations the packet get only copied if it is delivered to Dom0 IP stack through deliver_skb, which is due to this [2] patch. This affects DomU->Dom0 IP traffic and when Dom0 does routing/NAT for the guest. That's a bit unfortunate, but luckily it doesn't cause a major regression for this usecase. In the future we should try to eliminate that copy somehow. There are a few spinoff tasks which will be addressed in separate patches: - grant copy the header directly instead of map and memcpy. This should help us avoiding TLB flushing - use something else than ballooned pages - fix grant map to use page->index properly I've tried to broke it down to smaller patches, with mixed results, so I welcome suggestions on that part as well: 1: Use skb->cb to store pending_idx 2: Some refactoring 3: Change RX path for mapped SKB fragments (moved here to keep bisectability, review it after #4) 4: Introduce TX grant mapping 5: Remove old TX grant copy definitons and fix indentations 6: Add stat counters for zerocopy 7: Handle guests with too many frags 8: Timeout packets in RX path 9: Aggregate TX unmap operationsSeries applied, thanks. "This series looks good enough for me. IIRC Ian said it's still in his queue so I will wait for his final review." Maybe you mixed up mine with that? But that's also not eligible to be applied yet. Zoli _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |