lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2023]   [Nov]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [GIT PULL v2] Networking for 6.7
From

On 11/9/23 10:18 AM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 10:09 AM Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev> wrote:
>>
>> On 11/9/23 8:14 AM, Kirill A. Shutemov wrote:
>>> On Thu, Nov 09, 2023 at 08:01:39AM -0800, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Nov 9, 2023 at 7:49 AM Kirill A. Shutemov <kirill@shutemov.name> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Oct 31, 2023 at 02:09:48PM -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>>>>>> bpf: Add support for non-fix-size percpu mem allocation
>>>>> Recent changes in BPF increased per-CPU memory consumption a lot.
>>>>>
>>>>> On virtual machine with 288 CPUs, per-CPU consumtion increased from 111 MB
>>>>> to 969 MB, or 8.7x.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've bisected it to the commit 41a5db8d8161 ("bpf: Add support for
>>>>> non-fix-size percpu mem allocation"), which part of the pull request.
>>>> Hmm. This is unexpected. Thank you for reporting.
>>>>
>>>> How did you measure this 111 MB vs 969 MB ?
>>>> Pls share the steps to reproduce.
>>> Boot VMM with 288 (qemu-system-x86_64 -smp 288) and check Percpu: field of
>>> /proc/meminfo.
>> I did some experiments with my VM. My VM currently supports up to 255 cpus,
>> so I tried 4/32/252 number of cpus. For a particular number of cpus, two
>> experiments are done:
>> (1). bpf-percpu-mem-prefill
>> (2). no-bpf-percpu-mem-prefill
>>
>> For 4 cpu:
>> bpf-percpu-mem-prefill:
>> Percpu: 2000 kB
>> no-bpf-percpu-mem-prefill:
>> Percpu: 1808 kB
>>
>> bpf-percpu-mem-prefill percpu cost: (2000 - 1808)/4 KB = 48KB
>>
>> For 32 cpus:
>> bpf-percpu-mem-prefill:
>> Percpu: 25344 kB
>> no-bpf-percpu-mem-prefill:
>> Percpu: 14464 kB
>>
>> bpf-percpu-mem-prefill percpu cost: (25344 - 14464)/4 KB = 340KB
>>
>> For 252 cpus:
>> bpf-percpu-mem-prefill:
>> Percpu: 230912 kB
>> no-bpf-percpu-mem-prefill:
>> Percpu: 57856 kB
>>
>> bpf-percpu-mem-prefill percpu cost: (230912 - 57856)/4 KB = 686KB
>>
>> I am not able to reproduce the dramatic number from 111 MB to 969 MB.
>> My number with 252 cpus is from ~58MB to ~231MB.
> Even 231MB is way too much. We shouldn't be allocating that much.
> Let's switch to on-demand allocation. Only when bpf progs that
> user per-cpu are loaded.
Sounds good. Will craft a patch for this.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2023-11-20 13:54    [W:0.248 / U:0.856 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site