Messages in this thread | | | From | Eric Dumazet <> | Date | Mon, 13 Mar 2023 08:59:11 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next] net-sysfs: display two backlog queue len separately |
| |
On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 6:16 AM Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 13, 2023 at 8:34 PM Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com> wrote: > > > > On Sat, Mar 11, 2023 at 7:18 AM Jason Xing <kerneljasonxing@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > From: Jason Xing <kernelxing@tencent.com> > > > > > > Sometimes we need to know which one of backlog queue can be exactly > > > long enough to cause some latency when debugging this part is needed. > > > Thus, we can then separate the display of both. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jason Xing <kernelxing@tencent.com> > > > --- > > > net/core/net-procfs.c | 17 ++++++++++++----- > > > 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/net/core/net-procfs.c b/net/core/net-procfs.c > > > index 1ec23bf8b05c..97a304e1957a 100644 > > > --- a/net/core/net-procfs.c > > > +++ b/net/core/net-procfs.c > > > @@ -115,10 +115,14 @@ static int dev_seq_show(struct seq_file *seq, void *v) > > > return 0; > > > } > > > > > > -static u32 softnet_backlog_len(struct softnet_data *sd) > > > +static u32 softnet_input_pkt_queue_len(struct softnet_data *sd) > > > { > > > - return skb_queue_len_lockless(&sd->input_pkt_queue) + > > > - skb_queue_len_lockless(&sd->process_queue); > > > + return skb_queue_len_lockless(&sd->input_pkt_queue); > > > +} > > > + > > > +static u32 softnet_process_queue_len(struct softnet_data *sd) > > > +{ > > > + return skb_queue_len_lockless(&sd->process_queue); > > > } > > > > > > static struct softnet_data *softnet_get_online(loff_t *pos) > > > @@ -169,12 +173,15 @@ static int softnet_seq_show(struct seq_file *seq, void *v) > > > * mapping the data a specific CPU > > > */ > > > seq_printf(seq, > > > - "%08x %08x %08x %08x %08x %08x %08x %08x %08x %08x %08x %08x %08x\n", > > > + "%08x %08x %08x %08x %08x %08x %08x %08x %08x %08x %08x %08x %08x " > > > + "%08x %08x\n", > > > sd->processed, sd->dropped, sd->time_squeeze, 0, > > > 0, 0, 0, 0, /* was fastroute */ > > > 0, /* was cpu_collision */ > > > sd->received_rps, flow_limit_count, > > > - softnet_backlog_len(sd), (int)seq->index); > > > + 0, /* was len of two backlog queues */ > > > > You can not pretend the sum is zero, some user space tools out there > > would be fooled. > > > > > + (int)seq->index, > > > + softnet_input_pkt_queue_len(sd), softnet_process_queue_len(sd)); > > > return 0; > > > } > > > > > > -- > > > 2.37.3 > > > > > > > In general I would prefer we no longer change this file. > > Fine. Since now, let this legacy file be one part of history. > > > > > Perhaps add a tracepoint instead ? > > Thanks, Eric. It's one good idea. It seems acceptable if we only need > to trace two separate backlog queues where it can probably hit the > limit, say, in the enqueue_to_backlog().
Note that enqueue_to_backlog() already uses a specific kfree_skb_reason() reason (SKB_DROP_REASON_CPU_BACKLOG) so existing infrastructure should work just fine.
> > Similarly I decide to write another two tracepoints of time_squeeze > and budget_squeeze which I introduced to distinguish from time_squeeze > as the below link shows: > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/CAL+tcoAwodpnE2NjMLPhBbmHUvmKMgSykqx0EQ4YZaQHjrx0Hw@mail.gmail.com/. > For that change, any suggestions are deeply welcome :) >
For your workloads to hit these limits enough for you to be worried, it looks like you are not using any scaling stuff documented in Documentation/networking/scaling.rst
| |