lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2005]   [Sep]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    Subject[PATCH 0/3] netfilter : 3 patches to boost ip_tables performance
    Hi

    I have reworked net/ipv4/ip_tables.c to boost its performance, and post three
    patches.

    In oprofile results, ipt_do_table() was at the first position.
    It is now at 6th position, using 1/3 of the CPU it was using before.
    (Tests done on a dual Xeon i386 and a dual Opteron x86_64)

    Short description :

    1) No more central rwlock protecting each table (filter, nat, mangle, raw),
    but one lock per CPU. It avoids cache line ping pongs for each packet.

    2) Loop unrollings and various code optimizations to reduce branches
    mispredictions.

    3) NUMA aware allocation of memory (this part was posted earlier, but got some
    polishing problems)


    Long description:

    1) No more one rwlock_t protecting the 'curtain'

    One major bottleneck on SMP machines is the fact that one rwlock
    is taken in ipt_do_table() entry and exit. That 2 atomic operations are
    the killer, and even if multiple readers can work together on the same table
    (using read_lock_bh()), the cache line containing rwlock still must be
    taken exclusively by each CPU at entry/exit of ipt_do_table().

    As existing code already use separate copies of the data for each cpu, it is
    very easy to convert the central rwlock to separate rwlocks, allocated
    percpu (and NUMA aware).

    When a cpu enters ipt_do_table(), it can locks its local copy, touching a
    cache line that is not used by other cpus. Further operations are done on
    'local' copy of the data.

    When a sum of all counters must be done, we can write_lock each part at a
    time, instead of locking all the parts, reducing the lock contention.

    2) Loop unrolling

    It seems that with current compilers and CFLAGS, the code from
    ip_packet_match() is very bad, using lot of mispredicted conditional branches
    I made some patches and generated code on i386 and x86_64
    is much better.

    3) NUMA allocation.

    Part of the performance problem we have with netfilter is memory allocation
    is not NUMA aware, but 'only' SMP aware (ie each CPU normally touch
    separate cache lines)

    Even with small iptables rules, the cost of this misplacement can be high
    on common workloads.

    Instead of using one vmalloc() area (located in the node of the iptables
    process), we now allocate an area for each possible CPU, using NUMA policy
    (MPOL_PREFERRED) so that memory should be allocated in the CPU's node
    if possible.

    If the size of ipt_table is small enough (less than one page), we use
    kmalloc_node() instead of vmalloc(), to use less memory and less TLB entries)
    in small setups.

    Note1 : I also optimized get_counters(), using a SET_COUNTER() for the first
    cpu, avoiding a memset() and ADD_COUNTER() if SMP on other cpus.

    Note2 : This patch depends on another patch that declares sys_set_mempolicy()
    in include/linux/syscalls.h
    ( http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel&m=112725288622984&w=2 )


    Thank you
    Eric Dumazet
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-09-21 23:27    [W:0.023 / U:1.112 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site