Re: Optimizing instruction-cache, more packets at each stage
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hidden>
Date: 2016-01-15 14:17:25
On Fri, 15 Jan 2016 14:32:12 +0100 Hannes Frederic Sowa [off-list ref] wrote:
On 15.01.2016 14:22, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:quoted
Given net-next is closed, we have time to discuss controversial core changes right? ;-) I want to do some instruction-cache level optimizations. What do I mean by that... The kernel network stack code path (a packet travels) is obviously larger than the instruction-cache (icache). Today, every packet travel individually through the network stack, experiencing the exact same icache misses (as the previous packet). I imagine that we could process several packets at each stage in the packet processing code path. That way making better use of the icache. Today, we already allow NAPI net_rx_action() to process many (e.g. up-to 64) packets in the driver RX-poll routine. But the driver then calls the "full" stack for every single packet (e.g. via napi_gro_receive()) in its processing loop. Thus, trashing the icache for every packet. I have a prove-of-concept patch for ixgbe, which gives me 10% speedup on full IP forwarding. (This patch also optimize delaying when I touch the packet data, thus it also optimizes data-cache misses). The basic idea is that I delay calling ixgbe_rx_skb/napi_gro_receive, and allow the RX loop (in ixgbe_clean_rx_irq()) to run more iterations before "flushing" the icache (by calling the stack). This was only at the driver level. I also would like some API towards the stack. Maybe we could simple pass a skb-list? Changing / adjusting the stack to support processing in "stages" might be more difficult/controversial?I once tried this up till the vlan layer and error handling got so complex and complicated that I stopped there. Maybe it is possible in some separate stages.
I've already split the driver layer into a stage. Next I will split GRO layer into a stage. The GRO layer is actually quite expensive icache-wise as it have deep calls, as the compiler cannot inline functions due to the flexible function pointer approach. Simply enable/disable GRO show 10% CPU usage drop (and perf increase).
This needs redesign of a lot of stuff and while doing so I would switch from a more stack based approach to build the stack to try out a more iterative one (see e.g. stack space consumption problems).
The recursive nature of the rx handler (__netif_receive_skb_core/another_round) is not necessarily bad approach for icache usage (unless rx_handler() call indirectly flush the icache). But as you have shown it _is_ bad for stack space consumption. -- Best regards, Jesper Dangaard Brouer MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat Author of http://www.iptv-analyzer.org LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer