lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2019]   [Sep]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH] bpf: validate bpf_func when BPF_JIT is enabled
Date
Björn Töpel <bjorn.topel@intel.com> writes:

> On 2019-09-11 09:42, Yonghong Song wrote:
>> I am not an expert in XDP testing. Toke, Björn, could you give some
>> suggestions what to test for XDP performance here?
>
> I ran the "xdp_rxq_info" sample with and without Sami's patch:

Thanks for doing this!

> $ sudo ./xdp_rxq_info --dev enp134s0f0 --action XDP_DROP
>
> Before:
>
> Running XDP on dev:enp134s0f0 (ifindex:6) action:XDP_DROP options:no_touch
> XDP stats CPU pps issue-pps
> XDP-RX CPU 20 23923874 0
> XDP-RX CPU total 23923874
>
> RXQ stats RXQ:CPU pps issue-pps
> rx_queue_index 20:20 23923878 0
> rx_queue_index 20:sum 23923878
>
> After Sami's patch:
>
> Running XDP on dev:enp134s0f0 (ifindex:6) action:XDP_DROP options:no_touch
> XDP stats CPU pps issue-pps
> XDP-RX CPU 20 22998700 0
> XDP-RX CPU total 22998700
>
> RXQ stats RXQ:CPU pps issue-pps
> rx_queue_index 20:20 22998705 0
> rx_queue_index 20:sum 22998705
>
>
> So, roughly ~4% for this somewhat naive scenario.

Or (1/22998700 - 1/23923874) * 10**9 == 1.7 nanoseconds of overhead.

I guess that is not *too* bad; but it's still chipping away at
performance; anything we could do to lower the overhead?

-Toke

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2019-09-11 14:10    [W:0.038 / U:40.972 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site