Re: [PATCH net-next 4/4] gro: improve flow distribution across GRO buckets in dev_gro_receive()
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Date: 2021-03-12 16:35:09
Also in:
lkml
On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 5:22 PM Alexander Lobakin [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
Most of the functions that "convert" hash value into an index (when RPS is configured / XPS is not configured / etc.) set reciprocal_scale() on it. Its logics is simple, but fair enough and accounts the entire input value. On the opposite side, 'hash & (GRO_HASH_BUCKETS - 1)' expression uses only 3 least significant bits of the value, which is far from optimal (especially for XOR RSS hashers, where the hashes of two different flows may differ only by 1 bit somewhere in the middle). Use reciprocal_scale() here too to take the entire hash value into account and improve flow dispersion between GRO hash buckets. Signed-off-by: Alexander Lobakin <redacted> --- net/core/dev.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c index 65d9e7d9d1e8..bd7c9ba54623 100644 --- a/net/core/dev.c +++ b/net/core/dev.c@@ -5952,7 +5952,7 @@ static void gro_flush_oldest(struct napi_struct *napi, struct list_head *head) static enum gro_result dev_gro_receive(struct napi_struct *napi, struct sk_buff *skb) { - u32 bucket = skb_get_hash_raw(skb) & (GRO_HASH_BUCKETS - 1); + u32 bucket = reciprocal_scale(skb_get_hash_raw(skb), GRO_HASH_BUCKETS);
This is going to use 3 high order bits instead of 3 low-order bits. Now, had you use hash_32(skb_get_hash_raw(skb), 3), you could have claimed to use "more bits" Toeplitz already shuffles stuff. Adding a multiply here seems not needed. Please provide experimental results, because this looks unnecessary to me.