MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20230217100606.1234-1-nbd@nbd.name> <CANn89iJXjEWJcFbSMwKOXuupCVr4b-y4Gh+LwOQg+TQwJPQ=eg@mail.gmail.com>
 <acaf1607-412d-3142-1465-8d8439520228@nbd.name>
In-Reply-To: <acaf1607-412d-3142-1465-8d8439520228@nbd.name>
From:   Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Date:   Fri, 17 Feb 2023 13:57:33 +0100
Message-ID: <CANn89iLQa-FruxSUQycawQAHY=wCFP_Q3LHEQfusL1pUbNVxyg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC v2] net/core: add optional threading for rps backlog processing
To:     Felix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>
Cc:     netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 1:35 PM Felix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name> wrote:
>
> On 17.02.23 13:23, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 11:06 AM Felix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name> wrote:
> >>
> >> When dealing with few flows or an imbalance on CPU utilization, static RPS
> >> CPU assignment can be too inflexible. Add support for enabling threaded NAPI
> >> for RPS backlog processing in order to allow the scheduler to better balance
> >> processing. This helps better spread the load across idle CPUs.
> >>
> >> Signed-off-by: Felix Fietkau <nbd@nbd.name>
> >> ---
> >>
> >> RFC v2:
> >>  - fix rebase error in rps locking
> >
> > Why only deal with RPS ?
> >
> > It seems you propose the sofnet_data backlog be processed by a thread,
> > instead than from softirq ?
> Right. I originally wanted to mainly improve RPS, but my patch does
> cover backlog in general. I will update the description in the next
> version. Does the approach in general make sense to you?
>

I do not know, this seems to lack some (perf) numbers, and
descriptions of added max latencies and stuff like that :)