Thanks for working on patch of implementing sendmmsg. I will revise my patch base on it.
Thanks Zhenyu Gao 2017-07-13 0:25 GMT+08:00 Ben Pfaff <b...@ovn.org>: > On Fri, Jul 07, 2017 at 12:39:51AM +0000, Zhenyu Gao wrote: > > Sendmmsg can reduce cpu cycles in sending packets to kernel. > > Replace sendmsg with sendmmsg in function netdev_linux_send to send > > batch packets if sendmmsg is available. > > > > If kernel side doesn't support sendmmsg, will fallback to sendmsg. > > > > netserver > > |------------| > > | | > > | container | > > |----veth----| > > | > > | |------------| > > |---veth-| dpdk-ovs | netperf > > | | |--------------| > > |----dpdk----| | bare-metal | > > | |--------------| > > | | > > | | > > pnic-----------pnic > > > > Netperf was consumed to test the performance: > > > > 1)cmd:netperf -H remote-container -t UDP_STREAM -l 60 -- -m 1400 > > result: netserver received 2383.21Mb(sendmsg)/2551.64Mb(sendmmsg) > > > > 2)cmd:netperf -H remote-container -t UDP_STREAM -l 60 -- -m 60 > > result: netserver received 109.72Mb(sendmsg)/115.18Mb(sendmmsg) > > > > Sendmmsg show about 6% improvement in netperf UDP testing. > > > > Signed-off-by: Zhenyu Gao <sysugaozhe...@gmail.com> > > After looking at this, I think that it might be best to simply include a > general-purpose sendmmsg implementation in the tree. I sent out a > patch (although I haven't tested it): > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/787344/ > > What do you think about implementing your change on top of this? > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list d...@openvswitch.org https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev