Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 09:31:00 -0800 From: Adrian Chadd <adrian@freebsd.org> To: "Andrey V. Elsukov" <ae@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-src-stable@freebsd.org, "svn-src-all@freebsd.org" <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, "src-committers@freebsd.org" <src-committers@freebsd.org>, svn-src-stable-10@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r260504 - in stable/10/sys: netinet netinet6 Message-ID: <CAJ-VmonYWF6ebVcd07CFwT2Lt%2BE2i7Yeo00w6RhYeM3bvDbSOw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201401100945.s0A9jSUk028492@svn.freebsd.org> References: <201401100945.s0A9jSUk028492@svn.freebsd.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hah, thanks for beating me to the MFC. :) -a On 10 January 2014 01:45, Andrey V. Elsukov <ae@freebsd.org> wrote: > Author: ae > Date: Fri Jan 10 09:45:28 2014 > New Revision: 260504 > URL: http://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/260504 > > Log: > MFC r260151 (by adrian): > Use an RLOCK here instead of an RWLOCK - matching all the other calls > to lla_lookup(). > > This drastically reduces the very high lock contention when doing parallel > TCP throughput tests (> 1024 sockets) with IPv6. > > MFC r260187: > lla_lookup() does modification only when LLE_CREATE is specified. > Thus we can use IF_AFDATA_RLOCK() instead of IF_AFDATA_LOCK() when doing > lla_lookup() without LLE_CREATE flag. > > MFC r260217: > Add IF_AFDATA_WLOCK_ASSERT() in case lla_lookup() is called with > LLE_CREATE flag. > > Modified: > stable/10/sys/netinet/if_ether.c > stable/10/sys/netinet/in.c > stable/10/sys/netinet6/in6.c > stable/10/sys/netinet6/nd6.c > stable/10/sys/netinet6/nd6_nbr.c > Directory Properties: > stable/10/ (props changed) > > Modified: stable/10/sys/netinet/if_ether.c > ============================================================================== > --- stable/10/sys/netinet/if_ether.c Fri Jan 10 07:48:36 2014 (r260503) > +++ stable/10/sys/netinet/if_ether.c Fri Jan 10 09:45:28 2014 (r260504) > @@ -153,10 +153,10 @@ arp_ifscrub(struct ifnet *ifp, uint32_t > addr4.sin_len = sizeof(addr4); > addr4.sin_family = AF_INET; > addr4.sin_addr.s_addr = addr; > - IF_AFDATA_LOCK(ifp); > + IF_AFDATA_RLOCK(ifp); > lla_lookup(LLTABLE(ifp), (LLE_DELETE | LLE_IFADDR), > (struct sockaddr *)&addr4); > - IF_AFDATA_UNLOCK(ifp); > + IF_AFDATA_RUNLOCK(ifp); > } > #endif > > @@ -805,9 +805,9 @@ reply: > struct llentry *lle = NULL; > > sin.sin_addr = itaddr; > - IF_AFDATA_LOCK(ifp); > + IF_AFDATA_RLOCK(ifp); > lle = lla_lookup(LLTABLE(ifp), 0, (struct sockaddr *)&sin); > - IF_AFDATA_UNLOCK(ifp); > + IF_AFDATA_RUNLOCK(ifp); > > if ((lle != NULL) && (lle->la_flags & LLE_PUB)) { > (void)memcpy(ar_tha(ah), ar_sha(ah), ah->ar_hln); > > Modified: stable/10/sys/netinet/in.c > ============================================================================== > --- stable/10/sys/netinet/in.c Fri Jan 10 07:48:36 2014 (r260503) > +++ stable/10/sys/netinet/in.c Fri Jan 10 09:45:28 2014 (r260504) > @@ -1435,6 +1435,7 @@ in_lltable_lookup(struct lltable *llt, u > #endif > if (!(flags & LLE_CREATE)) > return (NULL); > + IF_AFDATA_WLOCK_ASSERT(ifp); > /* > * A route that covers the given address must have > * been installed 1st because we are doing a resolution, > > Modified: stable/10/sys/netinet6/in6.c > ============================================================================== > --- stable/10/sys/netinet6/in6.c Fri Jan 10 07:48:36 2014 (r260503) > +++ stable/10/sys/netinet6/in6.c Fri Jan 10 09:45:28 2014 (r260504) > @@ -2627,6 +2627,7 @@ in6_lltable_lookup(struct lltable *llt, > if (lle == NULL) { > if (!(flags & LLE_CREATE)) > return (NULL); > + IF_AFDATA_WLOCK_ASSERT(ifp); > /* > * A route that covers the given address must have > * been installed 1st because we are doing a resolution, > > Modified: stable/10/sys/netinet6/nd6.c > ============================================================================== > --- stable/10/sys/netinet6/nd6.c Fri Jan 10 07:48:36 2014 (r260503) > +++ stable/10/sys/netinet6/nd6.c Fri Jan 10 09:45:28 2014 (r260504) > @@ -1146,9 +1146,9 @@ nd6_nud_hint(struct rtentry *rt, struct > return; > > ifp = rt->rt_ifp; > - IF_AFDATA_LOCK(ifp); > + IF_AFDATA_RLOCK(ifp); > ln = nd6_lookup(dst6, ND6_EXCLUSIVE, NULL); > - IF_AFDATA_UNLOCK(ifp); > + IF_AFDATA_RUNLOCK(ifp); > if (ln == NULL) > return; > > @@ -1574,16 +1574,16 @@ nd6_cache_lladdr(struct ifnet *ifp, stru > * description on it in NS section (RFC 2461 7.2.3). > */ > flags = lladdr ? ND6_EXCLUSIVE : 0; > - IF_AFDATA_LOCK(ifp); > + IF_AFDATA_RLOCK(ifp); > ln = nd6_lookup(from, flags, ifp); > - > + IF_AFDATA_RUNLOCK(ifp); > if (ln == NULL) { > flags |= ND6_EXCLUSIVE; > + IF_AFDATA_LOCK(ifp); > ln = nd6_lookup(from, flags | ND6_CREATE, ifp); > IF_AFDATA_UNLOCK(ifp); > is_newentry = 1; > } else { > - IF_AFDATA_UNLOCK(ifp); > /* do nothing if static ndp is set */ > if (ln->la_flags & LLE_STATIC) { > static_route = 1; > @@ -1891,9 +1891,9 @@ nd6_output_lle(struct ifnet *ifp, struct > flags = ((m != NULL) || (lle != NULL)) ? LLE_EXCLUSIVE : 0; > if (ln == NULL) { > retry: > - IF_AFDATA_LOCK(ifp); > + IF_AFDATA_RLOCK(ifp); > ln = lla_lookup(LLTABLE6(ifp), flags, (struct sockaddr *)dst); > - IF_AFDATA_UNLOCK(ifp); > + IF_AFDATA_RUNLOCK(ifp); > if ((ln == NULL) && nd6_is_addr_neighbor(dst, ifp)) { > /* > * Since nd6_is_addr_neighbor() internally calls nd6_lookup(), > > Modified: stable/10/sys/netinet6/nd6_nbr.c > ============================================================================== > --- stable/10/sys/netinet6/nd6_nbr.c Fri Jan 10 07:48:36 2014 (r260503) > +++ stable/10/sys/netinet6/nd6_nbr.c Fri Jan 10 09:45:28 2014 (r260504) > @@ -736,9 +736,9 @@ nd6_na_input(struct mbuf *m, int off, in > * If no neighbor cache entry is found, NA SHOULD silently be > * discarded. > */ > - IF_AFDATA_LOCK(ifp); > + IF_AFDATA_RLOCK(ifp); > ln = nd6_lookup(&taddr6, LLE_EXCLUSIVE, ifp); > - IF_AFDATA_UNLOCK(ifp); > + IF_AFDATA_RUNLOCK(ifp); > if (ln == NULL) { > goto freeit; > }
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAJ-VmonYWF6ebVcd07CFwT2Lt%2BE2i7Yeo00w6RhYeM3bvDbSOw>