On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 16:12:38 +0800 "Zhang, Yanmin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-02-15 at 15:22 -0800, David Miller wrote: > > From: Eric Dumazet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 15:21:48 +0100 > > > > > On linux-2.6.25-rc1 x86_64 : > > > > > > offsetof(struct dst_entry, lastuse)=0xb0 > > > offsetof(struct dst_entry, __refcnt)=0xb8 > > > offsetof(struct dst_entry, __use)=0xbc > > > offsetof(struct dst_entry, next)=0xc0 > > > > > > So it should be optimal... I dont know why tbench prefers __refcnt being > > > on 0xc0, since in this case lastuse will be on a different cache line... > > > > > > Each incoming IP packet will need to change lastuse, __refcnt and __use, > > > so keeping them in the same cache line is a win. > > > > > > I suspect then that even this patch could help tbench, since it avoids > > > writing lastuse... > > > > I think your suspicions are right, and even moreso > > it helps to keep __refcnt out of the same cache line > > as input/output/ops which are read-almost-entirely :- > I think you are right. The issue is these three variables sharing the same > cache line > with input/output/ops. > > > ) > > > > I haven't done an exhaustive analysis, but it seems that > > the write traffic to lastuse and __refcnt are about the > > same. However if we find that __refcnt gets hit more > > than lastuse in this workload, it explains the regression. > I also think __refcnt is the key. I did a new testing by adding 2 unsigned > long > pading before lastuse, so the 3 members are moved to next cache line. The > performance is > recovered. > > How about below patch? Almost all performance is recovered with the new patch. > > Signed-off-by: Zhang Yanmin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > --- > > --- linux-2.6.25-rc1/include/net/dst.h 2008-02-21 14:33:43.000000000 > +0800 > +++ linux-2.6.25-rc1_work/include/net/dst.h 2008-02-21 14:36:22.000000000 > +0800 > @@ -52,11 +52,10 @@ struct dst_entry > unsigned short header_len; /* more space at head required > */ > unsigned short trailer_len; /* space to reserve at tail */ > > - u32 metrics[RTAX_MAX]; > - struct dst_entry *path; > - > - unsigned long rate_last; /* rate limiting for ICMP */ > unsigned int rate_tokens; > + unsigned long rate_last; /* rate limiting for ICMP */ > + > + struct dst_entry *path; > > #ifdef CONFIG_NET_CLS_ROUTE > __u32 tclassid; > @@ -70,10 +69,12 @@ struct dst_entry > int (*output)(struct sk_buff*); > > struct dst_ops *ops; > - > - unsigned long lastuse; > + > + u32 metrics[RTAX_MAX]; > + > atomic_t __refcnt; /* client references */ > int __use; > + unsigned long lastuse; > union { > struct dst_entry *next; > struct rtable *rt_next; > > Well, after this patch, we grow dst_entry by 8 bytes : sizeof(struct dst_entry)=0xd0 offsetof(struct dst_entry, input)=0x68 offsetof(struct dst_entry, output)=0x70 offsetof(struct dst_entry, __refcnt)=0xb4 offsetof(struct dst_entry, lastuse)=0xc0 offsetof(struct dst_entry, __use)=0xb8 sizeof(struct rtable)=0x140 So we dirty two cache lines instead of one, unless your cpu have 128 bytes cache lines ? I am quite suprised that my patch to not change lastuse if already set to jiffies changes nothing... If you have some time, could you also test this (unrelated) patch ? We can avoid dirty all the time a cache line of loopback device. diff --git a/drivers/net/loopback.c b/drivers/net/loopback.c index f2a6e71..0a4186a 100644 --- a/drivers/net/loopback.c +++ b/drivers/net/loopback.c @@ -150,7 +150,10 @@ static int loopback_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev) return 0; } #endif - dev->last_rx = jiffies; +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP + if (dev->last_rx != jiffies) +#endif + dev->last_rx = jiffies; /* it's OK to use per_cpu_ptr() because BHs are off */ pcpu_lstats = netdev_priv(dev); -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html