[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC 0/4]: xen-net{back, front}: Multiple transmit and receive queues
Cool! Finally! On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 04:23:20PM +0000, Andrew J. Bennieston wrote: > This patch series implements multiple transmit and receive queues (i.e. > multiple shared rings) for the xen virtual network interfaces. > > The series is split up as follows: > - Patches 1 and 3 factor out the queue-specific data for netback and > netfront respectively, and modify the rest of the code to use these > as appropriate. > - Patches 2 and 4 introduce new XenStore keys to negotiate and use > multiple shared rings and event channels, and code to connect these > as appropriate. > > All other transmit and receive processing remains unchanged, i.e. there > is a kthread per queue and a NAPI context per queue. > > The performance of these patches has been analysed in detail, with > results available at: > > http://wiki.xenproject.org/wiki/Xen-netback_and_xen-netfront_multi-queue_performance_testing > > To summarise: > * Using multiple queues allows a VM to transmit at line rate on a 10 > Gbit/s NIC, compared with a maximum aggregate throughput of 6 Gbit/s > with a single queue. > * For intra-host VM--VM traffic, eight queues provide 171% of the > throughput of a single queue; almost 12 Gbit/s instead of 6 Gbit/s. > * There is a corresponding increase in total CPU usage, i.e. this is a > scaling out over available resources, not an efficiency improvement. > * Results depend on the availability of sufficient CPUs, as well as the > distribution of interrupts and the distribution of TCP streams across > the queues. > > One open issue is how to deal with the tx_credit data for rate limiting. > This used to exist on a per-VIF basis, and these patches move it to > per-queue to avoid contention on concurrent access to the tx_credit > data from multiple threads. This has the side effect of breaking the > tx_credit accounting across the VIF as a whole. I cannot see a situation > in which people would want to use both rate limiting and a > high-performance multi-queue mode, but if this is problematic then it > can be brought back to the VIF level, with appropriate protection. > Obviously, it continues to work identically in the case where there is > only one queue. > I would go for per-queue limit at the stage as it simplifies things and keep you focus on core functionality. Wei. > Queue selection is currently achieved via an L4 hash on the packet (i.e. > TCP src/dst port, IP src/dst address) and is not negotiated between the > frontend and backend, since only one option exists. Future patches to > support other frontends (particularly Windows) will need to add some > capability to negotiate not only the hash algorithm selection, but also > allow the frontend to specify some parameters to this. > > Queue-specific XenStore entries for ring references and event channels > are stored hierarchically, i.e. under .../queue-N/... where N varies > from 0 to one less than the requested number of queues (inclusive). If > only one queue is requested, it falls back to the flat structure where > the ring references and event channels are written at the same level as > other vif information. > > -- > Andrew J. Bennieston _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |