Re: [PATCH net-next v10 0/5] net: devmem: improve cpu cost of RX token management
From: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>
Date: 2026-01-30 11:13:48
Also in:
linux-arch, linux-doc, linux-kselftest, lkml
On 1/27/26 06:48, Bobby Eshleman wrote:
On Mon, Jan 26, 2026 at 10:00 PM Stanislav Fomichev [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
On 01/26, Jakub Kicinski wrote:quoted
On Mon, 26 Jan 2026 10:45:22 -0800 Bobby Eshleman wrote:quoted
I'm onboard with improving what we have since it helps all of us currently using this API, though I'm not opposed to discussing a redesign in another thread/RFC. I do see the attraction to locating the core logic in one place and possibly reducing some complexity around socket/binding relationships. FWIW regarding nl, I do see it supports rtnl lock-free operations via '62256f98f244 rtnetlink: add RTNL_FLAG_DOIT_UNLOCKED' and routing was recently made lockless with that. I don't see / know of any fast path precedent. I'm aware there are some things I'm not sure about being relevant performance-wise, like hitting skb alloc an additional time every release batch. I'd want to do some minimal latency comparisons between that path and sockopt before diving head-first.FTR I'm not really pushing Netlink specifically, it may work it may not. Perhaps some other ioctl-y thing exists. Just in general setsockopt() on a specific socket feels increasingly awkward for buffer flow. Maybe y'all disagree. I thought I'd clarify since I may be seen as "Mr Netlink Everywhere" :)From my side, if we do a completely new uapi, my preference would be on an af_xdp like mapped rings (presumably on a netlink socket?) to completely avoid the user-kernel copies.I second liking that approach. No put_cmsg() and or token alloc overhead (both jump up in my profiling).
Hmm, makes me wonder why not use zcrx instead of reinventing it? It doesn't bind net_iov to sockets just as you do in this series. And it also returns buffers back via a shared ring. Otherwise you'll be facing same issues, like rings running out of space, and so you will need to have a fallback path. And user space will need to synchronise the ring if it's shared with other threads, and there will be a question of how to scale it next, possibly by creating multiple rings as I'll likely to do soon for zcrx. -- Pavel Begunkov