From: Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com>
To: Cake List <cake@lists.bufferbloat.net>
Subject: Re: [Cake] quick patch for split_gso
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2018 14:03:37 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAA93jw48GsM0P+FC+xSDZzayn+q2b6ukRYa-VoFdQfmV3yCDXQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAA93jw51b-GPeCGadPWa5Tfj4x9KP6JS4uu3jvO8WKVUWx4c=g@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2721 bytes --]
so, I went and tested that patch. Turned out len was signed... I'd put
it in the wrong place... and the very act of doing that test at all
permutes the result.
cake unshaped at 1gig, always splitting, ends up with a bql value of
about 42,000, full throughput, e.g.
if (skb_is_gso(skb)) {
...
avg median # data pts
Ping (ms) ICMP : 0.80 0.77 ms 341
TCP upload avg : 235.40 235.39 Mbits/s 301
TCP upload sum : 941.61 941.55 Mbits/s 301
TCP upload::1 : 235.36 235.39 Mbits/s 290
TCP upload::2 : 235.46 235.39 Mbits/s 291
TCP upload::3 : 235.38 235.45 Mbits/s 275
TCP upload::4 : 235.41 235.44 Mbits/s 278
conditionally splitting, either never or always, gives me bql of: 140852
if (skb_is_gso(skb) && len >= q->split_gso) {
avg median # data pts
Ping (ms) ICMP : 1.64 1.71 ms 347
TCP upload avg : 235.40 235.38 Mbits/s 301
TCP upload sum : 941.59 941.52 Mbits/s 301
TCP upload::1 : 235.35 235.44 Mbits/s 280
TCP upload::2 : 235.40 235.39 Mbits/s 276
TCP upload::3 : 235.47 235.43 Mbits/s 276
TCP upload::4 : 235.37 235.45 Mbits/s 282
the cache line miss can't possibly have cost that much. (?) Guess I
have to go check the range of len.
I WANT MY 800usec back!
PS For giggles, I accidentally ended up using pfifo_fast for one run.
I thought I'd broke something.
Summary of tcp_nup test run 'split_gso_test_again_len_512000_bql_auto'
(at 2018-07-25 20:51:10.533339):
avg median # data pts
Ping (ms) ICMP : 3.32 3.59 ms 347
TCP upload avg : 235.38 235.38 Mbits/s 301
TCP upload sum : 941.52 941.54 Mbits/s 301
TCP upload::1 : 152.48 150.93 Mbits/s 281
TCP upload::2 : 152.54 150.35 Mbits/s 286
TCP upload::3 : 483.96 491.12 Mbits/s 284
TCP upload::4 : 152.54 150.49 Mbits/s 284
On Tue, Jul 24, 2018 at 10:01 PM Dave Taht <dave.taht@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Ah... 1gbit, BQL at a sane size, 750 usec RTT. I guess I have to go
> compile this patch now.....
>
>
> --
>
> Dave Täht
> CEO, TekLibre, LLC
> http://www.teklibre.com
> Tel: 1-669-226-2619
--
Dave Täht
CEO, TekLibre, LLC
http://www.teklibre.com
Tel: 1-669-226-2619
[-- Attachment #2: cake_split_gso.patch --]
[-- Type: application/x-patch, Size: 2257 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-07-25 21:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-07-25 4:11 Dave Taht
2018-07-25 4:32 ` Dave Taht
2018-07-25 4:35 ` Dave Taht
2018-07-25 5:01 ` Dave Taht
2018-07-25 21:03 ` Dave Taht [this message]
2018-07-25 21:21 ` Dave Taht
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.bufferbloat.net/postorius/lists/cake.lists.bufferbloat.net/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CAA93jw48GsM0P+FC+xSDZzayn+q2b6ukRYa-VoFdQfmV3yCDXQ@mail.gmail.com \
--to=dave.taht@gmail.com \
--cc=cake@lists.bufferbloat.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox