On Wed, 6 Dec 2023 00:08:15 +0100 Lorenzo Bianconi wrote: > v00 (NS:ns0 - 192.168.0.1/24) <---> (NS:ns1 - 192.168.0.2/24) v01 ==(XDP_REDIRECT)==> v10 (NS:ns1 - 192.168.1.1/24) <---> (NS:ns2 - 192.168.1.2/24) v11 > > - v00: iperf3 client (pinned on core 0) > - v11: iperf3 server (pinned on core 7) > > net-next veth codebase (page_pool APIs): > ======================================= > - MTU 1500: ~ 5.42 Gbps > - MTU 8000: ~ 14.1 Gbps > - MTU 64000: ~ 18.4 Gbps > > net-next veth codebase + page_frag_cahe APIs [0]: > ================================================= > - MTU 1500: ~ 6.62 Gbps > - MTU 8000: ~ 14.7 Gbps > - MTU 64000: ~ 19.7 Gbps > > xdp_generic codebase + page_frag_cahe APIs (current proposed patch): > ==================================================================== > - MTU 1500: ~ 6.41 Gbps > - MTU 8000: ~ 14.2 Gbps > - MTU 64000: ~ 19.8 Gbps > > xdp_generic codebase + page_frag_cahe APIs [1]: > =============================================== This one should say page pool? > - MTU 1500: ~ 5.75 Gbps > - MTU 8000: ~ 15.3 Gbps > - MTU 64000: ~ 21.2 Gbps > > It seems page_pool APIs are working better for xdp_generic codebase > (except MTU 1500 case) while page_frag_cache APIs are better for > veth driver. What do you think? Am I missing something? IDK the details of veth XDP very well but IIUC they are pretty much the same. Are there any clues in perf -C 0 / 7? > [0] Here I have just used napi_alloc_frag() instead of > page_pool_dev_alloc_va()/page_pool_dev_alloc() in > veth_convert_skb_to_xdp_buff() > > [1] I developed this PoC to use page_pool APIs for xdp_generic code: Why not put the page pool in softnet_data?
