summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/include
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorJesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>2013-04-03 23:38:16 +0000
committerDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>2013-04-04 17:37:05 -0400
commit19952cc4f8f572493293a8caed27c4be89c5fc9d (patch)
treea1b42a559ddc6d68ec7debcb7231cc00dbccc8ac /include
parentd66248326410ed0d3e813ebe974b3e6638df0717 (diff)
net: frag queue per hash bucket locking
This patch implements per hash bucket locking for the frag queue hash. This removes two write locks, and the only remaining write lock is for protecting hash rebuild. This essentially reduce the readers-writer lock to a rebuild lock. This patch is part of "net: frag performance followup" http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/263644 of which two patches have already been accepted: Same test setup as previous: (http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/257155) Two 10G interfaces, on seperate NUMA nodes, are under-test, and uses Ethernet flow-control. A third interface is used for generating the DoS attack (with trafgen). Notice, I have changed the frag DoS generator script to be more efficient/deadly. Before it would only hit one RX queue, now its sending packets causing multi-queue RX, due to "better" RX hashing. Test types summary (netperf UDP_STREAM): Test-20G64K == 2x10G with 65K fragments Test-20G3F == 2x10G with 3x fragments (3*1472 bytes) Test-20G64K+DoS == Same as 20G64K with frag DoS Test-20G3F+DoS == Same as 20G3F with frag DoS Test-20G64K+MQ == Same as 20G64K with Multi-Queue frag DoS Test-20G3F+MQ == Same as 20G3F with Multi-Queue frag DoS When I rebased this-patch(03) (on top of net-next commit a210576c) and removed the _bh spinlock, I saw a performance regression. BUT this was caused by some unrelated change in-between. See tests below. Test (A) is what I reported before for patch-02, accepted in commit 1b5ab0de. Test (B) verifying-retest of commit 1b5ab0de corrospond to patch-02. Test (C) is what I reported before for this-patch Test (D) is net-next master HEAD (commit a210576c), which reveals some (unknown) performance regression (compared against test (B)). Test (D) function as a new base-test. Performance table summary (in Mbit/s): (#) Test-type: 20G64K 20G3F 20G64K+DoS 20G3F+DoS 20G64K+MQ 20G3F+MQ ---------- ------- ------- ---------- --------- -------- ------- (A) Patch-02 : 18848.7 13230.1 4103.04 5310.36 130.0 440.2 (B) 1b5ab0de : 18841.5 13156.8 4101.08 5314.57 129.0 424.2 (C) Patch-03v1: 18838.0 13490.5 4405.11 6814.72 196.6 461.6 (D) a210576c : 18321.5 11250.4 3635.34 5160.13 119.1 405.2 (E) with _bh : 17247.3 11492.6 3994.74 6405.29 166.7 413.6 (F) without bh: 17471.3 11298.7 3818.05 6102.11 165.7 406.3 Test (E) and (F) is this-patch(03), with(V1) and without(V2) the _bh spinlocks. I cannot explain the slow down for 20G64K (but its an artificial "lab-test" so I'm not worried). But the other results does show improvements. And test (E) "with _bh" version is slightly better. Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com> Acked-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org> Acked-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> ---- V2: - By analysis from Hannes Frederic Sowa and Eric Dumazet, we don't need the spinlock _bh versions, as Netfilter currently does a local_bh_disable() before entering inet_fragment. - Fold-in desc from cover-mail V3: - Drop the chain_len counter per hash bucket. Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Diffstat (limited to 'include')
-rw-r--r--include/net/inet_frag.h8
1 files changed, 7 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/include/net/inet_frag.h b/include/net/inet_frag.h
index 7cac9c5789b5..6f41b45e819e 100644
--- a/include/net/inet_frag.h
+++ b/include/net/inet_frag.h
@@ -50,10 +50,16 @@ struct inet_frag_queue {
*/
#define INETFRAGS_MAXDEPTH 128
+struct inet_frag_bucket {
+ struct hlist_head chain;
+ spinlock_t chain_lock;
+};
+
struct inet_frags {
- struct hlist_head hash[INETFRAGS_HASHSZ];
+ struct inet_frag_bucket hash[INETFRAGS_HASHSZ];
/* This rwlock is a global lock (seperate per IPv4, IPv6 and
* netfilter). Important to keep this on a seperate cacheline.
+ * Its primarily a rebuild protection rwlock.
*/
rwlock_t lock ____cacheline_aligned_in_smp;
int secret_interval;