On 2017年08月31日 22:30, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
Incomplete results at this stage, but I do see this correlation between
flows. It occurs even while not running out of zerocopy descriptors,
which I cannot yet explain.
Running two threads in a guest, each with a udp socket, each
sending up to 100 datagrams, or until EAGAIN, every msec.
Sender A sends 1B datagrams.
Sender B sends VHOST_GOODCOPY_LEN, which is enough
to trigger zcopy_used in vhost net.
A local receive process on the host receives both flows. To avoid
a deep copy when looping the packet onto the receive path,
changed skb_orphan_frags_rx to always return false (gross hack).
The flow with the larger packets is redirected through netem on ifb0:
modprobe ifb
ip link set dev ifb0 up
tc qdisc add dev ifb0 root netem limit $LIMIT rate 1MBit
tc qdisc add dev tap0 ingress
tc filter add dev tap0 parent ffff: protocol ip \
u32 match ip dport 8000 0xffff \
action mirred egress redirect dev ifb0
For 10 second run, packet count with various ifb0 queue lengths $LIMIT:
no filter
rx.A: ~840,000
rx.B: ~840,000
limit 1
rx.A: ~500,000
rx.B: ~3100
ifb0: 3273 sent, 371141 dropped
limit 100
rx.A: ~9000
rx.B: ~4200
ifb0: 4630 sent, 1491 dropped
limit 1000
rx.A: ~6800
rx.B: ~4200
ifb0: 4651 sent, 0 dropped
Sender B is always correctly rate limited to 1 MBps or less. With a
short queue, it ends up dropping a lot and sending even less.
When a queue builds up for sender B, sender A throughput is strongly
correlated with queue length. With queue length 1, it can send almost
at unthrottled speed. But even at limit 100 its throughput is on the
same order as sender B.
What is surprising to me is that this happens even though the number
of ubuf_info in use at limit 100 is around 100 at all times. In other words,
it does not exhaust the pool.
When forcing zcopy_used to be false for all packets, this effect of
sender A throughput being correlated with sender B does not happen.
no filter
rx.A: ~850,000
rx.B: ~850,000
limit 100
rx.A: ~850,000
rx.B: ~4200
ifb0: 4518 sent, 876182 dropped
Also relevant is that with zerocopy, the sender processes back off
and report the same count as the receiver. Without zerocopy,
both senders send at full speed, even if only 4200 packets from flow
B arrive at the receiver.
This is with the default virtio_net driver, so without napi-tx.
It appears that the zerocopy notifications are pausing the guest.
Will look at that now.
It was indeed as simple as that. With 256 descriptors, queuing even
a hundred or so packets causes the guest to stall the device as soon
as the qdisc is installed.
Adding this check
+ in_use = nvq->upend_idx - nvq->done_idx;
+ if (nvq->upend_idx < nvq->done_idx)
+ in_use += UIO_MAXIOV;
+
+ if (in_use > (vq->num >> 2))
+ zcopy_used = false;
Has the desired behavior of reverting zerocopy requests to copying.
Without this change, the result is, as previously reported, throughput
dropping to hundreds of packets per second on both flows.
With the change, pps as observed for a few seconds at handle_tx is
zerocopy=165 copy=168435
zerocopy=0 copy=168500
zerocopy=65 copy=168535
Both flows continue to send at more or less normal rate, with only
sender B observing massive drops at the netem.
With the queue removed the rate reverts to
zerocopy=58878 copy=110239
zerocopy=58833 copy=110207
This is not a 50/50 split, which impliesTw that some packets from the large
packet flow are still converted to copying. Without the change the rate
without queue was 80k zerocopy vs 80k copy, so this choice of
(vq->num >> 2) appears too conservative.
However, testing with (vq->num >> 1) was not as effective at mitigating
stalls. I did not save that data, unfortunately. Can run more tests on fine
tuning this variable, if the idea sounds good.
Looks like there're still two cases were left:
1) sndbuf is not INT_MAX
2) tx napi is used for virtio-net
1) could be a corner case, and for 2) what your suggest here may not
solve the issue since it still do in order completion.
Thanks
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
