Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: epoll_wait() performance
To:     David Laight <David.Laight@ACULAB.COM>,
        'Paolo Abeni' <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
Cc:     'Marek Majkowski' <marek@cloudflare.com>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        network dev <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        kernel-team <kernel-team@cloudflare.com>
References: <bc84e68c0980466096b0d2f6aec95747@AcuMS.aculab.com>
 <CAJPywTJYDxGQtDWLferh8ObjGp3JsvOn1om1dCiTOtY6S3qyVg@mail.gmail.com>
 <5f4028c48a1a4673bd3b38728e8ade07@AcuMS.aculab.com>
 <20191127164821.1c41deff@carbon>
 <0b8d7447e129539aec559fa797c07047f5a6a1b2.camel@redhat.com>
 <2f1635d9300a4bec8a0422e9e9518751@AcuMS.aculab.com>
 <313204cf-69fd-ec28-a22c-61526f1dea8b@gmail.com>
 <1265e30d04484d08b86ba2abef5f5822@AcuMS.aculab.com>
From:   Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <c46e43d1-ba7d-39d9-688f-0141931df1b0@gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 29 Nov 2019 17:07:20 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/60.9.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1265e30d04484d08b86ba2abef5f5822@AcuMS.aculab.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


On 11/28/19 2:17 AM, David Laight wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet
>> Sent: 27 November 2019 17:47
> ...
>> A QUIC server handles hundred of thousands of ' UDP flows' all using only one UDP socket
>> per cpu.
>>
>> This is really the only way to scale, and does not need kernel changes to efficiently
>> organize millions of UDP sockets (huge memory footprint even if we get right how
>> we manage them)
>>
>> Given that UDP has no state, there is really no point trying to have one UDP
>> socket per flow, and having to deal with epoll()/poll() overhead.
> 
> How can you do that when all the UDP flows have different destination port numbers?
> These are message flows not idempotent requests.
> I don't really want to collect the packets before they've been processed by IP.
> 
> I could write a driver that uses kernel udp sockets to generate a single message queue
> than can be efficiently processed from userspace - but it is a faff compiling it for
> the systems kernel version.

Well if destinations ports are not under your control,
you also could use AF_PACKET sockets, no need for 'UDP sockets' to receive UDP traffic,
especially it the rate is small.