LeoY a écrit :
Here is the modifications I made:
//skbuff.h
//I added the folloing definitions
#define MAX_POOL_SIZE 4096
unsigned char *skbuff_data_pool[MAX_POOL_SIZE];
int skbPoolHead, skbPoolTail;
//skb_init()
//I add the following codes:
for(i=0;i<MAX_POOL_SIZE;i++)
skbuff_data_pool[i] = NULL;
skbPoolHead = skbPoolTail = 0;
//alloc_skb()
//I made the following changes
if (skbuff_data_pool[skbPoolHead])
{
data = skbuff_data_pool[skbPoolHead];
skbuff_data_pool[skbPoolHead] = NULL;
if (++skbPoolHead == MAX_POOL_SIZE)
skbPoolHead = 0;
}
else{ //Original path
size = SKB_DATA_ALIGN(size);
data = kmalloc(size + sizeof(struct skb_shared_info), gfp_mask);
}
//skb_release_data()
//I made the following changes:
if ((skbPoolHead == skbPoolTail) && (skbuff_data_pool[skbPoolHead] !=
NULL))
//Original path
kfree(skb->head);
else{
if (skbuff_data_pool[skbPoolTail])
panic("Tail pointer must be null");
skbuff_data_pool[skbPoolTail] = skb->head;
if (++skbPoolTail == MAX_POOL_SIZE)
skbPoolTail = 0;
}
Hum... Lot of problems I think
Are you aware that skb_alloc() / skb_free() can handle data buffers of
different sizes ?
So if you kmalloc() a small buffer, and store it later in your ring buffer,
you should not give it back to a caller that need a biger buffer.
If you want your 'ring buffer'to work, I suspect you should ignore the 'size'
and let it be the max possible size handled in your machine.
Then, dont forget about SMP and IRQs : I dont see in your code how you protect
against concurrent processors accessing your ring buffers, and how you protect
against IRQ (since a nic handler can runs on IRQ or softirq context)
kmalloc()/kfree() are SMP safe.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Eric Dumazet" <[email protected]>
To: "LeoY" <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, October 08, 2005 2:47 PM
Subject: Re: Is this skb recycle buffer helpful to improve Linux network
stack performance?
LeoY a écrit :
Hi,
Motivation: we noticed alloc_skb()/kfree() used lots of clock ticks when
handling heavy network traffic. As Linux kernel always need to call
kmalloc()/kfree() to allocate and deallocate a skb DATA buffer(not
sk_buff)
for each incoming/outgoing packet, we try to reduce the frequence of
calling
these memory functions.
I wangt to set up a ring buffer in Linux kernel(skbuff.c) and recycle
those
skb data buffers. The basic idea is as follows:
1. Create a ring buffer. This ring buffer has a head pointer which
points to
the virtual address of the data buffer to be reused; It also has a tail
pointer, which can be used to store the virutal address of skb data
buffer
for those transmitted packets.
2. If the ring buffer is full, just use normal kmalloc()/kfree()
operation
to manager those skb data buffers instead of recycling them.
3. if any DATA buffer is available, Instead of calling kmalloc(),
assign a
skb data buffer directly from ring buffer to the incoming packets.
4. If ring buffer still has space, Instead of calling kfree(), store
the skb
data buffer into the ring buffer.
5. if the head and tail pointer overlap and head pointer is not
empty, just
stop accpeting more DATA buffer until some DATA buffer is used for the
incoming packets.
I tested my method on the latest Linux kernel 2.6.13.3, it works with
the
normal traffic; However, the Linux kernel crashed under the heavy
network
traffic.
Any idea to make this ring bufer work under the heavy network traffic?
Your idea seems interesting, but you forgot to post a link to the code
you wrote. How do you want us to help you ?
Eric
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]