From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com (us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com [170.10.129.124]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 68C28170A15 for ; Thu, 1 Aug 2024 09:07:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722503235; cv=none; b=ceddjD8Pfo6ZDDYDV2TvfPRkVC6dqd22JOLhq4V2pKMleFt4x2z91SBeYgrFigTaSyTl03wr9b2rq0Vs3ShtaH+fGipn9KUh70k26dFiqRnyY7VN71K7Xud2tKftVGvDRpngEIEpCiDwT3Z82dyn8HEQbr1JqH0M1/g2a2erjmk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722503235; c=relaxed/simple; bh=oz+f2ExRuhr8sgqTuD8RIIayx9QHr6/sG8gtOY5Vzws=; h=Message-ID:Date:MIME-Version:Subject:To:Cc:References:From: In-Reply-To:Content-Type; b=nOBeYP7sLBaV97RN2Z39Fc18USF/X80PU5AFwbJxiQBIHGvTNdhADmhgA1CgEXWdUtXTdy0k6x2SrCzcuoWRaiqTq/9YNFgGcFxNsuE/Xxy1r2HqnAx5Zr/kqOR8r4qZsAU9MXev3XKIrrX4X66ARX6Zmsv66MSjYksh7Ba8T3M= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b=FBdubWV2; arc=none smtp.client-ip=170.10.129.124 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=redhat.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="FBdubWV2" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1722503232; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=mSKEfuB4n+/b+oxF1D4wGQsbWuy3r00dVzWZOwQpkNw=; b=FBdubWV2cVUH0G3578SyqyvPPGUhsIYBsZo4hy5LyLRw+Z28Hc/iGVElaJ5Y0AUCWXt3LG cUwkIBU8GiMsH6Z6getYR0WOHZdhNvD6cNiMtTqNxjxzv7YJT6tGj7z/CINV/VbFgb/bZv 32yy53C3qZR1bWKG9zTiOQeCjbHo0Tg= Received: from mail-wm1-f70.google.com (mail-wm1-f70.google.com [209.85.128.70]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-55-n98GteyNMaWvw1iSQuqjcg-1; Thu, 01 Aug 2024 05:07:11 -0400 X-MC-Unique: n98GteyNMaWvw1iSQuqjcg-1 Received: by mail-wm1-f70.google.com with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-428087d1ddfso10434465e9.1 for ; Thu, 01 Aug 2024 02:07:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1722503230; x=1723108030; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:content-language :references:cc:to:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=mSKEfuB4n+/b+oxF1D4wGQsbWuy3r00dVzWZOwQpkNw=; b=BenwWJz4DDNlkXvHIYuXDfeUfDVykMOTUk8/nnyNxXZbtKkZNra1mgzeJILU8XCHjJ yE218Wcy4An7mOk3N0yxtMETDEZe33jVjA5G0hB259/FgvW1GP12YPaiZErtpnuoJXRy BuMGFCtCHPr44B2NsCgnDeKWEXkTQQkZdP4sAygiulEzSVuS3Av6kkv+y1yGIjxKE/Wi bilvwVFv/1ooy4ZdxsPOV4W3S/MxuW5XDv0QYQ7B9iWXT1q9DHsuKzIfGmk1DYNM+S7r Yam+2nlxD8xf4y90GMkMJWyo4YewNQznPPbHGPfz4ajc3ZbP6HilqvlrcqsMHByr9oks pFJA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWwTM021l9Ksl7esv9sMoL1Jhq4LODKYFTzYeb5QHXM1xMDZj9vxCUU9JELLH0M5Qtk28fxjhnqjIM5Fm8=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxOKNs0AtEu8ViciVFEOhg882PztXeQ3zhurmkx+23usDBIe8TY Fn6sCT9Iq8HjfhshvI3I/JZGSzM+p5xOpZ/Ve1MGiPzeZNqYLhGkJHPsdfT0s8yrEyKMH5ZjUdl gze4oyj3Wx2kr9D/1FNE/CAhQmOf1lpaH9AOW9ZVPrfW+NRs/GGTXHrFWHwMh3w== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3546:b0:427:9f6f:9c00 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-428b4aed78dmr9025865e9.6.1722503229899; Thu, 01 Aug 2024 02:07:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFZ8Yo49UNfIIekEb+fzZKQGd2Ra6P+DX7ISYAX2XZE8+eSpcsrF+n5sZUOduN0j+FdCYDkzg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:600c:3546:b0:427:9f6f:9c00 with SMTP id 5b1f17b1804b1-428b4aed78dmr9025705e9.6.1722503229351; Thu, 01 Aug 2024 02:07:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPV6:2a0d:3344:1712:4410:9110:ce28:b1de:d919? ([2a0d:3344:1712:4410:9110:ce28:b1de:d919]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 5b1f17b1804b1-4282baa9071sm49462285e9.13.2024.08.01.02.07.08 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 01 Aug 2024 02:07:08 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <9b084601-9d64-4737-8c32-4c295aafd3df@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2024 11:07:07 +0200 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: skbuff: Skip early return in skb_unref when debugging To: Breno Leitao Cc: "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , leit@meta.com, Chris Mason , "open list:NETWORKING DRIVERS" , open list References: <20240729104741.370327-1-leitao@debian.org> Content-Language: en-US From: Paolo Abeni In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 7/31/24 13:24, Breno Leitao wrote: > Hello Paolo, > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 11:38:38AM +0200, Paolo Abeni wrote: >> Could you please benchmark such scenario before and after this patch? > > I've tested it on a 18-core Xeon D-2191A host, and I haven't found any > different in either TX/RX in TCP or UDP. At the same time, I must admit > that I have very low confidence in my tests. > > I run the following tests for 10x on the same machine, just changing my > patch, and I getting the simple average of these 10 iterations. This is > what I am doing for TCP and UDP: > > TCP: > # iperf -s & > # iperf -u -c localhost > > Output: 16.5 Gbits/sec > > UDP: > # iperf -s -u & > # iperf -u -c localhost > > Output: 1.05 Mbits/sec > > I don't know how to explain why UDP numbers are so low. I am happy to > run different tests, if you have any other recommendation. Beyond the '-b 0' argument, as noted by Jason, you need to do manual CPU pinning of both the sender and the receiver. Additionally, to really flood the receiver you likely have to place the sender on a different host. In any case, given all the prior discussion, I don't intend to block this patch. Cheers, Paolo