Re: [PATCH] rps: process the skb directly if rps cpu not changed

From: Yunsheng Lin
Date: Tue Mar 21 2023 - 22:02:42 EST


On 2023/3/21 20:12, yang.yang29@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> From: xu xin <xu.xin16@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> In the RPS procedure of NAPI receiving, regardless of whether the
> rps-calculated CPU of the skb equals to the currently processing CPU, RPS
> will always use enqueue_to_backlog to enqueue the skb to per-cpu backlog,
> which will trigger a new NET_RX softirq.

Does bypassing the backlog cause out of order problem for packet handling?
It seems currently the RPS/RFS will ensure order delivery,such as:
https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v6.3-rc3/source/net/core/dev.c#L4485

Also, this is an optimization, it should target the net-next branch:
[PATCH net-next] rps: process the skb directly if rps cpu not changed

>
> Actually, it's not necessary to enqueue it to backlog when rps-calculated
> CPU id equals to the current processing CPU, and we can call
> __netif_receive_skb or __netif_receive_skb_list to process the skb directly.
> The benefit is that it can reduce the number of softirqs of NET_RX and reduce
> the processing delay of skb.
>
> The measured result shows the patch brings 50% reduction of NET_RX softirqs.
> The test was done on the QEMU environment with two-core CPU by iperf3.
> taskset 01 iperf3 -c 192.168.2.250 -t 3 -u -R;
> taskset 02 iperf3 -c 192.168.2.250 -t 3 -u -R;
>
> Previous RPS:
> CPU0 CPU1
> NET_RX: 45 0 (before iperf3 testing)
> NET_RX: 1095 241 (after iperf3 testing)
>
> Patched RPS:
> CPU0 CPU1
> NET_RX: 28 4 (before iperf3 testing)
> NET_RX: 573 32 (after iperf3 testing)
>
> Signed-off-by: xu xin <xu.xin16@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Zhang Yunkai <zhang.yunkai@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Reviewed-by: Yang Yang <yang.yang29@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Cc: Xuexin Jiang <jiang.xuexin@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> net/core/dev.c | 6 ++++--
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
> index c7853192563d..c33ddac3c012 100644
> --- a/net/core/dev.c
> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> @@ -5666,8 +5666,9 @@ static int netif_receive_skb_internal(struct sk_buff *skb)
> if (static_branch_unlikely(&rps_needed)) {
> struct rps_dev_flow voidflow, *rflow = &voidflow;
> int cpu = get_rps_cpu(skb->dev, skb, &rflow);
> + int current_cpu = smp_processor_id();
>
> - if (cpu >= 0) {
> + if (cpu >= 0 && cpu != current_cpu) {
> ret = enqueue_to_backlog(skb, cpu, &rflow->last_qtail);
> rcu_read_unlock();
> return ret;
> @@ -5699,8 +5700,9 @@ void netif_receive_skb_list_internal(struct list_head *head)
> list_for_each_entry_safe(skb, next, head, list) {
> struct rps_dev_flow voidflow, *rflow = &voidflow;
> int cpu = get_rps_cpu(skb->dev, skb, &rflow);
> + int current_cpu = smp_processor_id();
>
> - if (cpu >= 0) {
> + if (cpu >= 0 && cpu != current_cpu) {
> /* Will be handled, remove from list */
> skb_list_del_init(skb);
> enqueue_to_backlog(skb, cpu, &rflow->last_qtail);
>