Thread (1 message) flat view 1 message, 1 author, 2018-04-09

Re: [PATCH] vhost-net: set packet weight of tx polling to 2 * vq size

From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Date: 2018-04-09 05:46:58
Also in: kvm, lkml, netdev

On Mon, Apr 09, 2018 at 04:09:20AM +0000, haibinzhang(张海斌) wrote:
quoted
On Fri, Apr 06, 2018 at 08:22:37AM +0000, haibinzhang(张海斌) wrote:
quoted
handle_tx will delay rx for tens or even hundreds of milliseconds when tx busy
polling udp packets with small length(e.g. 1byte udp payload), because setting
VHOST_NET_WEIGHT takes into account only sent-bytes but no single packet length.

Ping-Latencies shown below were tested between two Virtual Machines using
netperf (UDP_STREAM, len=1), and then another machine pinged the client:

Packet-Weight      Ping-Latencies(millisecond)
                   min      avg       max
Origin           3.319   18.489    57.303
64               1.643    2.021     2.552
128              1.825    2.600     3.224
256              1.997    2.710     4.295
512              1.860    3.171     4.631
1024             2.002    4.173     9.056
2048             2.257    5.650     9.688
4096             2.093    8.508    15.943
And this is with Q size 256 right?
Yes. Ping-latencies with 512 VQ size show below.

Packet-Weight      Ping-Latencies(millisecond)
                    min      avg       max
Origin           6.357   29.177    66.245
64               2.798    3.614     4.403
128              2.861    3.820     4.775
256              3.008    4.018     4.807
512              3.254    4.523     5.824
1024             3.079    5.335     7.747
2048             3.944    8.201     12.762
4096             4.158   11.057    19.985

We will submit again. Is there anything else?
Seems pretty consistent, a small dip at 2 VQ sizes.


Acked-by: Michael S. Tsirkin <mst@redhat.com>
quoted
quoted
Ring size is a hint from device about a burst size it can tolerate. Based on
benchmarks, set the weight to 2 * vq size.

To evaluate this change, another tests were done using netperf(RR, TX) between
two machines with Intel(R) Xeon(R) Gold 6133 CPU @ 2.50GHz, and vq size was
tweaked through qemu. Results shown below does not show obvious changes.
What I asked for is ping-latency with different VQ sizes,
streaming below does not show anything.
quoted
vq size=256 TCP_RR                vq size=512 TCP_RR
size/sessions/+thu%/+normalize%   size/sessions/+thu%/+normalize%
   1/       1/  -7%/        -2%      1/       1/   0%/        -2%
   1/       4/  +1%/         0%      1/       4/  +1%/         0%
   1/       8/  +1%/        -2%      1/       8/   0%/        +1%
  64/       1/  -6%/         0%     64/       1/  +7%/        +3%
  64/       4/   0%/        +2%     64/       4/  -1%/        +1%
  64/       8/   0%/         0%     64/       8/  -1%/        -2%
 256/       1/  -3%/        -4%    256/       1/  -4%/        -2%
 256/       4/  +3%/        +4%    256/       4/  +1%/        +2%
 256/       8/  +2%/         0%    256/       8/  +1%/        -1%

vq size=256 UDP_RR                vq size=512 UDP_RR
size/sessions/+thu%/+normalize%   size/sessions/+thu%/+normalize%
   1/       1/  -5%/        +1%      1/       1/  -3%/        -2%
   1/       4/  +4%/        +1%      1/       4/  -2%/        +2%
   1/       8/  -1%/        -1%      1/       8/  -1%/         0%
  64/       1/  -2%/        -3%     64/       1/  +1%/        +1%
  64/       4/  -5%/        -1%     64/       4/  +2%/         0%
  64/       8/   0%/        -1%     64/       8/  -2%/        +1%
 256/       1/  +7%/        +1%    256/       1/  -7%/         0%
 256/       4/  +1%/        +1%    256/       4/  -3%/        -4%
 256/       8/  +2%/        +2%    256/       8/  +1%/        +1%

vq size=256 TCP_STREAM            vq size=512 TCP_STREAM
size/sessions/+thu%/+normalize%   size/sessions/+thu%/+normalize%
  64/       1/   0%/        -3%     64/       1/   0%/         0%
  64/       4/  +3%/        -1%     64/       4/  -2%/        +4%
  64/       8/  +9%/        -4%     64/       8/  -1%/        +2%
 256/       1/  +1%/        -4%    256/       1/  +1%/        +1%
 256/       4/  -1%/        -1%    256/       4/  -3%/         0%
 256/       8/  +7%/        +5%    256/       8/  -3%/         0%
 512/       1/  +1%/         0%    512/       1/  -1%/        -1%
 512/       4/  +1%/        -1%    512/       4/   0%/         0%
 512/       8/  +7%/        -5%    512/       8/  +6%/        -1%
1024/       1/   0%/        -1%   1024/       1/   0%/        +1%
1024/       4/  +3%/         0%   1024/       4/  +1%/         0%
1024/       8/  +8%/        +5%   1024/       8/  -1%/         0%
2048/       1/  +2%/        +2%   2048/       1/  -1%/         0%
2048/       4/  +1%/         0%   2048/       4/   0%/        -1%
2048/       8/  -2%/         0%   2048/       8/   5%/        -1%
4096/       1/  -2%/         0%   4096/       1/  -2%/         0%
4096/       4/  +2%/         0%   4096/       4/   0%/         0%
4096/       8/  +9%/        -2%   4096/       8/  -5%/        -1%

Signed-off-by: Haibin Zhang <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Yunfang Tai <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Lidong Chen <redacted>
Code is fine but I'd like to see validation of the heuristic
2*vq->num with another vq size.


quoted
---
 drivers/vhost/net.c | 8 +++++++-
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/vhost/net.c b/drivers/vhost/net.c
index 8139bc70ad7d..3563a305cc0a 100644
--- a/drivers/vhost/net.c
+++ b/drivers/vhost/net.c
@@ -44,6 +44,10 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(experimental_zcopytx, "Enable Zero Copy TX;"
  * Using this limit prevents one virtqueue from starving others. */
 #define VHOST_NET_WEIGHT 0x80000
 
+/* Max number of packets transferred before requeueing the job.
+ * Using this limit prevents one virtqueue from starving rx. */
+#define VHOST_NET_PKT_WEIGHT(vq) ((vq)->num * 2)
+
 /* MAX number of TX used buffers for outstanding zerocopy */
 #define VHOST_MAX_PEND 128
 #define VHOST_GOODCOPY_LEN 256
@@ -473,6 +477,7 @@ static void handle_tx(struct vhost_net *net)
 	struct socket *sock;
 	struct vhost_net_ubuf_ref *uninitialized_var(ubufs);
 	bool zcopy, zcopy_used;
+	int sent_pkts = 0;
 
 	mutex_lock(&vq->mutex);
 	sock = vq->private_data;
@@ -580,7 +585,8 @@ static void handle_tx(struct vhost_net *net)
 		else
 			vhost_zerocopy_signal_used(net, vq);
 		vhost_net_tx_packet(net);
-		if (unlikely(total_len >= VHOST_NET_WEIGHT)) {
+		if (unlikely(total_len >= VHOST_NET_WEIGHT) ||
+		    unlikely(++sent_pkts >= VHOST_NET_PKT_WEIGHT(vq))) {
 			vhost_poll_queue(&vq->poll);
 			break;
 		}
-- 
2.12.3
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help