From owner-freebsd-net@FreeBSD.ORG Wed May 20 23:53:29 2015 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-net@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40FE7AC for ; Wed, 20 May 2015 23:53:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f179.google.com (mail-wi0-f179.google.com [209.85.212.179]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD947197E for ; Wed, 20 May 2015 23:53:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wicmx19 with SMTP id mx19so2757089wic.0 for ; Wed, 20 May 2015 16:53:21 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type; bh=nkn7DXxZhZu5Lj9W1pv0xz/L5FBCD/w94hHcM6zOaMQ=; b=ff9QA7OVTD7OrgUY7cL8W5rwK2y55vq9wzeFarppnLOCQhCsJcKZ+SbOHNA7OiO+zk Iv2TehnR1zg6lCiS4f3dAT0+u9bYlPTp0oLBkPOmNWItInmRUYxk3KXq5V4iJC5xAZ6B 1th+Imx+GTFMMm5oQ+CQwC7gjkIfWea2tTbmzni6ab7t3oLy/8vC49t8+jqbFe6YLMYM STUMiSQXRZy4u/5d7qNP9KJWI2bCeWJtYzw3Ua3t0WIIV1l+pFJ+pHg8vN3yGpGz/Faj vlcfTz+51SGub4jq7nZ0rtl8gfvyw7dIo4T6xqUSxmls9YwDpXhqMiA+W9W3WbO/bJEI jQJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnr10v0DM/Y23ZKbW7iUMiw04Lumt5c4Iyb5X0OXf+/XJHHUeDadZ8BkwUNU1vrZhvZG3Eg X-Received: by 10.194.5.74 with SMTP id q10mr68928830wjq.27.1432166001511; Wed, 20 May 2015 16:53:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from FRI2JCHARBON-M1.local ([217.30.88.7]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id 9sm29230040wjr.11.2015.05.20.16.53.20 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 20 May 2015 16:53:20 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <555D1E67.6090108@freebsd.org> Date: Thu, 21 May 2015 01:53:11 +0200 From: Julien Charbon User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Adrian Chadd CC: FreeBSD Net Subject: Re: TCP stack lock contention with short-lived connections References: <537F39DF.1090900@verisign.com> <537FB51D.2060401@verisign.com> <537FBFA4.1010902@FreeBSD.org> <53834368.6070103@verisign.com> <555C8BC9.2080304@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="0EgAKMmkr6i04pt5gn7Ko509NsudC6ALP" X-BeenThere: freebsd-net@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: Networking and TCP/IP with FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 23:53:29 -0000 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --0EgAKMmkr6i04pt5gn7Ko509NsudC6ALP Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 20/05/15 16:57, Adrian Chadd wrote: > On 20 May 2015 at 06:27, Julien Charbon wrote: >> On 26/05/14 15:36, Julien Charbon wrote: >> [...] >> >> For people interested about this short-lived TCP connection scalabili= ty >> effort, you can subscribe to the review of our latest (and biggest so >> far) change: >> >> Decompose TCP INP_INFO lock to increase short-lived connections scalab= ility >> https://reviews.freebsd.org/D2599 >> >> The main goal of this review is ideally to start the rough discussion= >> before BSDCan (and then discuss details in person at BSDCan), and ease= >> tests by other people with more exotic configurations (thanks Adrian f= or >> your early tests). This patch still improves the short-lived TCP >> connection rate (setup and teardown) from 60k/sec to 150k/sec. >=20 > I'm using this in our testing lab at work. I get to around 105k/sec, > but I think that's primarily because of other lock contention in the > kernel (things doing unnecessary ioctl()s.) Nice, always good to see other people running/testing changes. On pure number size, I would add that benchmarks are basically lies [:)] as you get highest numbers from ideal conditions that are never met in production. Then, more interesting(/less lie) part is the relative improvement you get using the exact same setup and for us it is currently from 60k/sec to 150k/sec. As example, on our older hardware/older configuration it was from 35k/sec to 105k/sec. My 2 cents. -- Julien --0EgAKMmkr6i04pt5gn7Ko509NsudC6ALP Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Comment: GPGTools - https://gpgtools.org iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJVXR5vAAoJEKVlQ5Je6dhxI5AIAKGEBkWvYu9J5dgfANHnddP1 Zh7NvxB424DSaIP1zM7D5EcH2OFQ/bkfDCsrR2mxDcJrsTNHo8VpzSJD751zy+aU FVIXvKdAgCADQW3YVW9wimtufbLH+XNrLRJpqJ6s97ZxOp/qPOeMRJ2DiYwsIgr8 37nJQdohknU9fAe0Q1wAVK7oxVp9ZEM8XbPVYjIPAglLZoMeDsBzurAwWg0REg96 J4q6B1L2poiTQ704IpCYul5k2wIQmGQgG4McTxN3XEcXy1zAEZN1z9W0JSupyqZq 7zgANH5FcjpaUQdiNXVaDHC4GklDQLao462ze4vTNcVBK48G5dWxjD8XdB7Xbvg= =+Sqi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --0EgAKMmkr6i04pt5gn7Ko509NsudC6ALP--