Received: by 2002:a05:6602:18e:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id m14csp3396131ioo; Mon, 30 May 2022 00:38:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyZXEOAgL1GrmGLZJN5aJhE2v40iCwo7+FJ5uwJ6Y4r5vLmSKQYoSPr2g9vTKq7OBaGqJWJ X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:b048:b0:6fe:be4a:3ecf with SMTP id bj8-20020a170906b04800b006febe4a3ecfmr37073674ejb.104.1653896318101; Mon, 30 May 2022 00:38:38 -0700 (PDT) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1653896318; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=eajWBHTjYE9savunEA/IMDM08FMJhk5z6kD9rAP1PvPC9Y4yXFMPoP6NJ+fyImjUYB WiSuIdSmr1tDdzRtPqmp1rfG4tlwWOI0WHW80GpHSlwRlz2FEKtBELStNlxhwn+gu7vc DXb0ngXfUzKROQWgHjGWXi2GMUO/jjuDwc+uzh4p14p9tgLRlpVpQuJdluTSoIQVCB8P SPNw+eJ9yW+UANSAMepKu4ACxWmcwxXpjU8CNXqAhg789p8iB0+0UjfnEXucaM8WZj8d wQEstKRZLP7kGb4luyBuOyON3VLrtiH4OLUTBJGRBmSHcy7lkTDndcW9mVijEKHDhsup zQPQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:content-transfer-encoding:mime-version :message-id:date:subject:cc:to:from:dkim-signature; bh=3ZtQGplpK1TUOtshd/f0IPODZV9We7sq8TM2GN3EieU=; b=Qzv3/w5ZQWoKkq1b2f7T9LSrbwfNBYbLeD2eJwCXQoAfl6qDpgbfLHcNKAKJ1NSy4d G0t6kdj2m+Nu7WRcVzP0Vod1tyg4CuQ9Ucu2WUMLF4vGDovrWEIPBW3eI1tmrXYgwFK5 9PlsNHtGAzGjg1Tsdfb+KyeU1MrGbzlfZ8AeWsXLiOBDqyzfkh3vhm6BwPZqj0wYcZg2 ZL/U3no8op7pnL1/KGadA1mSaqTfcVPf4Ek7uCikPM7PGNAqs9XCYZ+O1tt0mDe8bcrJ dsv5o6n/GIjiPd3D7mf2YiE/foMh5tSCGBcggmgKsiMdCrZdltb/6qJVRC64mu7FzuDu B2qg== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@corp.netease.com header.s=s210401 header.b=A7OuLVkR; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=corp.netease.com Return-Path: Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email. [2620:137:e000::1:20]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id y5-20020a170906470500b006feed02de3asi10823908ejq.151.2022.05.30.00.38.12; Mon, 30 May 2022 00:38:38 -0700 (PDT) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; dkim=pass header.i=@corp.netease.com header.s=s210401 header.b=A7OuLVkR; spf=pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=NONE sp=NONE dis=NONE) header.from=corp.netease.com Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232343AbiE3DQ3 (ORCPT + 99 others); Sun, 29 May 2022 23:16:29 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42326 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230190AbiE3DQY (ORCPT ); Sun, 29 May 2022 23:16:24 -0400 Received: from corp-front10-corp.i.nease.net (corp-front11-corp.i.nease.net [42.186.62.105]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC34A4BB88; Sun, 29 May 2022 20:16:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=corp.netease.com; s=s210401; h=Received:From:To:Cc:Subject: Date:Message-Id:MIME-Version:Content-Transfer-Encoding; bh=3ZtQG plpK1TUOtshd/f0IPODZV9We7sq8TM2GN3EieU=; b=A7OuLVkRtBPo/LvMY8qLh zvlX3RenAztIQ2UlyMYSk/Ar/zUuLXhYSLBqghk33CuxKLx7zmKvVajeXDoukc1m 17p7/0pXooZqLLrGJNCocxuu4/aQl+lidQstnAjmmIPlnrYhShnMvFG1tAHQCQN6 tBQhAU8gVxaqsEJLXT2th0= Received: from pubt1-k8s74.yq.163.org (unknown [115.238.122.38]) by corp-front11-corp.i.nease.net (Coremail) with SMTP id aYG_CgA3UmT0NpRiZmklAA--.15991S2; Mon, 30 May 2022 11:16:04 +0800 (HKT) From: liuyacan@corp.netease.com To: kgraul@linux.ibm.com, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com Cc: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, ubraun@linux.ibm.com, tonylu@linux.alibaba.com Subject: SMC-R problem under multithread Date: Mon, 30 May 2022 11:16:04 +0800 Message-Id: <20220530031604.144875-1-liuyacan@corp.netease.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.20.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-CM-TRANSID: aYG_CgA3UmT0NpRiZmklAA--.15991S2 X-Coremail-Antispam: 1UD129KBjvdXoW7JrWfXFWxXw1rKF4xKw1xKrg_yoWkCrb_WF 4kGF1UA3y3JrWIgw4Ivr10yrZaqay5Cwn8Z34kKr10k3ykXwnxCFZ5X393Xa1kGF4Fkrn0 gwn0vrZrtw1a9jkaLaAFLSUrUUUUjb8apTn2vfkv8UJUUUU8Yxn0WfASr-VFAUDa7-sFnT 9fnUUIcSsGvfJTRUUUbJkYjxAI6xCIbckI1I0E57IF64kEYxAxM7k0a2IF6w4xM7kC6x80 4xWl14x267AKxVW8JVW5JwAFc2x0x2IEx4CE42xK8VAvwI8IcIk0rVWrJVCq3wAFIxvE14 AKwVWUJVWUGwA2ocxC64kIII0Yj41l84x0c7CEw4AK67xGY2AK021l84ACjcxK6xIIjxv2 0xvE14v26w1j6s0DM28EF7xvwVC0I7IYx2IY6xkF7I0E14v26rxl6s0DM28EF7xvwVC2z2 80aVAFwI0_GcCE3s1l84ACjcxK6I8E87Iv6xkF7I0E14v26rxl6s0DM2kK67ZEXf0FJ3sC 6x9vy-n0Xa0_Xr1Utr1kJwI_Jr4le2I262IYc4CY6c8Ij28IcVAaY2xG8wAqjxCE34x0Y4 8IcwAqx4xG64xvF2IEw4CE5I8CrVC2j2WlYx0E2Ix0cI8IcVAFwI0_JrI_JrylYx0Ex4A2 jsIE14v26r1j6r4UMcvjeVCFs4IE7xkEbVWUJVW8JwACjcxG0xvY0x0EwIxGrwACI402YV CY1x02628vn2kIc2xKxwAKzVCY07xG64k0F24l7I0Y64k_MxkI7II2jI8vz4vEwIxGrwCF 04k20xvY0x0EwIxGrwCF72vEw2IIxxk0rwCFx2IqxVCFs4IE7xkEbVWUJVW8JwCFI7vE0w C20s026c02F40E14v26r1j6r18MI8I3I0E7480Y4vE14v26r106r1rMI8E67AF67kF1VAF wI0_Jw0_GFylIxkGc2Ij64vIr41lIxAIcVC0I7IYx2IY67AKxVWUJVWUCwCI42IY6xIIjx v20xvEc7CjxVAFwI0_Gr0_Cr1lIxAIcVCF04k26cxKx2IYs7xG6r1j6r1xMIIF0xvEx4A2 jsIE14v26r1j6r4UMIIF0xvEx4A2jsIEc7CjxVAFwI0_Gr0_Gr1UYxBIdaVFxhVjvjDU0x ZFpf9x07jD_-PUUUUU= X-CM-SenderInfo: 5olx5txfdqquhrush05hwht23hof0z/1tbiBQATCVt763voNAAPs8 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.0 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on lindbergh.monkeyblade.net Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi experts, I recently used memcached to test the performance of SMC-R relative to TCP, but the results are confusing me. When using multithread on the server side, the performance of SMC-R is not as good as TCP. Specifically, I tested 4 scenarios with server thread: 1\2\4\8. The client uses 8threads fixedly. server: (smc_run) memcached -t 1 -m 16384 -p [SERVER-PORT] -U 0 -F -c 10240 -o modern client: (smc-run) memtier_benchmark -s [SERVER-IP] -p [SERVER-PORT] -P memcache_text --random-data --data-size=100 --data-size-pattern=S --key-minimum=30 --key-maximum=100 -n 5000000 -t 8 The result is as follows: SMC-R: server-thread ops/sec client-cpu server-cpu 1 242k 220% 97% 2 362k 241% 128% 4 378k 242% 160% 8 395k 242% 210% TCP: server-thread ops/sec client-cpu server-cpu 1 185k 224% 100% 2 435k 479% 200% 4 780k 731% 400% 8 938k 800% 659% It can be seen that as the number of threads increases, the performance increase of SMC-R is much slower than that of TCP. Am I doing something wrong? Or is it only when CPU resources are tight that SMC-R has a significant advantage ? Any suggestions are welcome. Thanks & Regards, Yacan.