Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 12 Jun 2019 11:52:29 +0800 | From | Feng Tang <> | Subject | Re: [LKP] [tcp] 8b27dae5a2: netperf.Throughput_Mbps -25.7% regression |
| |
On Tue, Jun 04, 2019 at 06:07:35PM +0800, Feng Tang wrote: > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 11:23:14PM +0800, Feng Tang wrote: > > Hi Eric, > > > > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 05:21:40AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > > On Thu, May 30, 2019 at 3:31 AM Feng Tang <feng.tang@intel.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > On Wed, Apr 03, 2019 at 02:34:36PM +0800, kernel test robot wrote: > > > > > Greeting, > > > > > > > > > > FYI, we noticed a -25.7% regression of netperf.Throughput_Mbps due to commit: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > commit: 8b27dae5a2e89a61c46c6dbc76c040c0e6d0ed4c ("tcp: add one skb cache for rx") > > > > > https://git.kernel.org/cgit/linux/kernel/git/next/linux-next.git master > > > > > > > > Hi Eric, > > > > > > > > Could you help to check this? thanks, > > > > > > > > > > Hmmm... patch is old and had some bugs that have been fixed. > > > > > > What numbers do you have with more recent kernels ? > > > > > > I just run the test with 5.2-rc2, and the regression is still there. > > Hi Eric, > > Any hint on this? > > >From the perf data, the spinlock contention has an obvious increase: > > 9.28 +7.6 16.91 perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath._raw_spin_lock.free_one_page.__free_pages_ok.___pskb_trim > 18.55 +8.6 27.14 perf-profile.calltrace.cycles-pp.native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath._raw_spin_lock_irqsave.get_page_from_freelist.__alloc_pages_nodemask.skb_page_frag_refill
Hi Eric,
Any thoughts?
Actually I did some further check. The increased lock contention comes from the mm zone lock for page alloc/free. I did an experiment by changing the SKB_FRAG_PAGE_ORDER from 32K to 64K, the lock contention is dramatically reduced, and the throughput got some recovery (10% ~ 15% gain) depending on HW platform, but can't fully recover the -25.7% loss. Hope this info helps.
Thanks, Feng
> > And for commit 8b27dae5a2 ("tcp: add one skb cache for rx"), IIUC, it > is not a real cache like the "tx skb cache" patch, and kind of a > delayed freeing. > > Thanks, > Feng > >
| |