On Tue, Jul 14, 2020 at 11:53:20PM +0200, Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote: > >David Ahern <dsahern@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >>> Version | Test | Native | Generic > >>> 5.8 rc1 | xdp_redirect_map i40e->i40e | 10.0M | 1.9M > >>> 5.8 rc1 | xdp_redirect_map i40e->veth | 12.7M | 1.6M > >>> 5.8 rc1 + patch | xdp_redirect_map i40e->i40e | 10.0M | 1.9M > >>> 5.8 rc1 + patch | xdp_redirect_map i40e->veth | 12.3M | 1.6M > >>> 5.8 rc1 + patch | xdp_redirect_map_multi i40e->i40e | 7.2M | 1.5M > >>> 5.8 rc1 + patch | xdp_redirect_map_multi i40e->veth | 8.5M | 1.3M > >>> 5.8 rc1 + patch | xdp_redirect_map_multi i40e->i40e+veth | 3.0M | 0.98M > >>> > >>> The bpf_redirect_map_multi() is slower than bpf_redirect_map() as we loop > >>> the arrays and do clone skb/xdpf. The native path is slower than generic > >>> path as we send skbs by pktgen. So the result looks reasonable. > >>> > >>> Last but not least, thanks a lot to Jiri, Eelco, Toke and Jesper for > >>> suggestions and help on implementation. > >>> > >>> [0] https://xdp-project.net/#Handling-multicast > >>> > >>> v7: Fix helper flag check > >>> Limit the *ex_map* to use DEVMAP_HASH only and update function > >>> dev_in_exclude_map() to get better performance. > >> > >> Did it help? The performance numbers in the table above are the same as > >> in v6... > >> > > > > If there is only 1 entry in the exclude map, then the numbers should be > > about the same. > > I would still expect the lack of the calls to devmap_get_next_key() to > at least provide a small speedup, no? That the numbers are completely > unchanged looks a bit suspicious... As I replied to David, I didn't re-run the test as I thought there should no much difference as the exclude map on has 1 entry. There should be a small speedup compared with previous patch. But as the test system re-installed and rebooted, there will be some jitter to the test result. It would be a little hard to observe the improvement. Thanks Hangbin
