Re: [PATCH v2 net-net 0/3] Increase the limit of tuntap queues

From: Pankaj Gupta
Date: Mon Nov 24 2014 - 13:42:37 EST


Sorry! forgot to add Michael, adding now.

> Networking under KVM works best if we allocate a per-vCPU rx and tx
> queue in a virtual NIC. This requires a per-vCPU queue on the host side.
> Modern physical NICs have multiqueue support for large number of queues.
> To scale vNIC to run multiple queues parallel to maximum number of vCPU's
> we need to increase number of queues support in tuntap.
>
> Changes from v1
> PATCH 2: David Miller - sysctl changes to limit number of queues
> not required for unprivileged users(dropped).
>
> Changes from RFC
> PATCH 1: Sergei Shtylyov - Add an empty line after declarations.
> PATCH 2: Jiri Pirko - Do not introduce new module paramaters.
> Michael.S.Tsirkin- We can use sysctl for limiting max number
> of queues.
>
> This series is to increase the limit of tuntap queues. Original work is being
> done by 'jasowang@xxxxxxxxxx'. I am taking this
> 'https://lkml.org/lkml/2013/6/19/29'
> patch series as a reference. As per discussion in the patch series:
>
> There were two reasons which prevented us from increasing number of tun
> queues:
>
> - The netdev_queue array in netdevice were allocated through kmalloc, which
> may
> cause a high order memory allocation too when we have several queues.
> E.g. sizeof(netdev_queue) is 320, which means a high order allocation would
> happens when the device has more than 16 queues.
>
> - We store the hash buckets in tun_struct which results a very large size of
> tun_struct, this high order memory allocation fail easily when the memory
> is
> fragmented.
>
> The patch 60877a32bce00041528576e6b8df5abe9251fa73 increases the number of tx
> queues. Memory allocation fallback to vzalloc() when kmalloc() fails.
>
> This series tries to address following issues:
>
> - Increase the number of netdev_queue queues for rx similarly its done for tx
> queues by falling back to vzalloc() when memory allocation with kmalloc()
> fails.
>
> - Switches to use flex array to implement the flow caches to avoid higher
> order
> allocations.
>
> - Increase number of queues to 256, maximum number is equal to maximum number
> of vCPUS allowed in a guest.
>
> I have done some testing to test any regression with sample program which
> creates
> tun/tap for single queue / multiqueue device. I have also done testing with
> multiple
> parallel Netperf sessions from guest to host for different combination of
> queues
> and CPU's. It seems to be working fine without much increase in cpu load with
> the
> increase in number of queues.
>
> For this test vhost threads are pinned to separate CPU's. Below are the
> results:
> Host kernel: 3.18.rc4, Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-3520M CPU @ 2.90GHz, 4 CPUS
> NIC : Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation 82579LM Gigabit Network
>
> 1] Before patch applied limit: Single Queue
> Guest, smp=2,
> 19:57:44 CPU %usr %nice %sys %iowait %irq %soft %steal
> %guest %gnice %idle
> 19:57:44 all 2.90 0.00 3.68 0.98 0.13 0.61 0.00
> 4.64 0.00 87.06
>
> 2] Patch applied, Tested with 2 queues, with vhost threads pinned to
> different physical cpus
> Guest, smp=2, queues =2
> 23:21:59 CPU %usr %nice %sys %iowait %irq %soft %steal
> %guest %gnice %idle
> 23:21:59 all 1.80 0.00 1.57 1.49 0.18 0.23 0.00
> 1.41 0.00 93.32
>
> 3] Tested with 4 queues, with vhost threads pinned to different physical cpus
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Guest, smp=4, queues =4
> 23:09:43 CPU %usr %nice %sys %iowait %irq %soft %steal
> %guest %gnice %idle
> 23:09:43 all 1.89 0.00 1.63 1.35 0.19 0.23 0.00
> 1.33 0.00 93.37
>
> Patches Summary:
> net: allow large number of rx queues
> tuntap: Reduce the size of tun_struct by using flex array
> tuntap: Increase the number of queues in tun
>
> drivers/net/tun.c | 58
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------
> net/core/dev.c | 19 ++++++++++++-----
> 2 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 22 deletions(-)
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/