Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
        id S1752463AbeAJVsF (ORCPT <rfc822;ralf@linux-mips.org> + 1 other);
        Wed, 10 Jan 2018 16:48:05 -0500
Received: from mail-wm0-f41.google.com ([74.125.82.41]:37906 "EHLO
        mail-wm0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1752134AbeAJVsD (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Wed, 10 Jan 2018 16:48:03 -0500
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBosBhnYw3GuRlJLxV62+S52gJhnMbw2UFjleP7XP0cpeIBbPMdxWofufjvO2HtoeKOppe2YVKA==
Message-ID: <1515620880.3350.44.camel@arista.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 1/2] softirq: Defer net rx/tx processing to ksoftirqd
 context
From: Dmitry Safonov <dima@arista.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, 0x7f454c46@gmail.com,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
        Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        "Levin, Alexander (Sasha Levin)" <alexander.levin@verizon.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        "Paul E. McKenney" <paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Radu Rendec <rrendec@arista.com>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@redhat.com>,
        Stanislaw Gruszka <sgruszka@redhat.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Wanpeng Li <wanpeng.li@hotmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 21:48:00 +0000
In-Reply-To: <CANn89iK3M97MN0Pf3nXb+UAqqhUWOdSthHRBTYCwP75Ax_hO8Q@mail.gmail.com>
References: <20180109133623.10711-1-dima@arista.com>
         <20180109133623.10711-2-dima@arista.com>
         <CANn89iK3M97MN0Pf3nXb+UAqqhUWOdSthHRBTYCwP75Ax_hO8Q@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.24.6 (3.24.6-1.fc26) 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, 2018-01-09 at 10:02 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 9, 2018 at 5:36 AM, Dmitry Safonov <dima@arista.com>
> wrote:
> > Warning: Not merge-ready
> > 
> > I. Current workflow of ksoftirqd.
> >   Softirqs are processed in the context of ksoftirqd iff they are
> >   being raised very frequently. How it works:
> >   do_softirq() and invoke_softirq() deffer pending softirq iff
> > 
> 
> ...
> 
> > 
> >   Note, that I tested in VMs and I've found that if I produce more
> >   hw irqs on the host, than the results for master are not that
> >   dramatically bad, but still much worse then with RFC.
> >   By that reason I have qualms if my test's results are correct.
> 
> Note that deferring all NET RX/TX to ksoftirqd is going to
> dramatically hurt tail latencies.
> 
> You really should test with RPC like workloads (netperf -t TCP_RR)
> and
> hundred of threads per cpu :/

Yeah, thanks for the reply, will give that a shot.

> 
> It seems we are going to revert/adapt 4cd13c21b2 , not defer more
> stuff to ksoftirqd.

Hmm, what if we use some other logic for deferring/non-deferring
like checking how many softirqs where serviced during process's
timeslice and decide if proceed with __do_softirq() or defer it
not to starve a task? Might that make sense?

-- 
Thanks,
             Dmitry