Hi, what is the result of this patch set now?
Thanks
LQ
-----Original Message-----
From: Liu, Qiao
Sent: Thursday, September 24, 2020 8:59 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [PATCH] Use BPF to distribute packet to different work thread.
Remove printf
# HG changeset patch
# User Liu Qiao <[email protected]>
# Date 1599735293 14400
# Thu Sep 10 06:54:53 2020 -0400
# Node ID c2eabe9168d0cbefc030807a0808568d86c93e4f
# Parent da5e3f5b16733167142b599b6af3ce9469a07d52
Use BPF to distribute packet to different work thread.
Use Berkeley Packet Filter to get packet queue_mapping number, and use this
queue_mapping number to distribute the packet to different work thread, this
will improve CPU utilization and http latency.
Author: Samudrala, Sridhar <[email protected]>
diff -r da5e3f5b1673 -r c2eabe9168d0 auto/os/linux
--- a/auto/os/linux Wed Sep 02 23:13:36 2020 +0300
+++ b/auto/os/linux Thu Sep 10 06:54:53 2020 -0400
@@ -32,6 +32,10 @@
have=NGX_HAVE_POSIX_FADVISE . auto/nohave fi
+if [ $version -lt 263680 ]; then
+ have=NGX_HAVE_REUSEPORT_CBPF . auto/nohave fi
+
# epoll, EPOLLET version
ngx_feature="epoll"
diff -r da5e3f5b1673 -r c2eabe9168d0 auto/unix
--- a/auto/unix Wed Sep 02 23:13:36 2020 +0300
+++ b/auto/unix Thu Sep 10 06:54:53 2020 -0400
@@ -331,6 +331,17 @@
ngx_feature_test="setsockopt(0, SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEPORT, NULL, 0)"
. auto/feature
+ngx_feature="SO_REUSEPORT_CBPF"
+ngx_feature_name="NGX_HAVE_REUSEPORT_CBPF"
+ngx_feature_run=no
+ngx_feature_incs="#include <sys/socket.h>
+ #include <linux/filter.h>
+ #include <error.h>"
+ngx_feature_path=
+ngx_feature_libs=
+ngx_feature_test="setsockopt(0, SOL_SOCKET, SO_ATTACH_REUSEPORT_CBPF, NULL, 0)"
+. auto/feature
+
ngx_feature="SO_ACCEPTFILTER"
ngx_feature_name="NGX_HAVE_DEFERRED_ACCEPT"
diff -r da5e3f5b1673 -r c2eabe9168d0 src/core/ngx_connection.c
--- a/src/core/ngx_connection.c Wed Sep 02 23:13:36 2020 +0300
+++ b/src/core/ngx_connection.c Thu Sep 10 06:54:53 2020 -0400
@@ -8,7 +8,10 @@
#include <ngx_config.h>
#include <ngx_core.h>
#include <ngx_event.h>
-
+#if (NGX_HAVE_REUSEPORT_CBPF)
+#include <linux/filter.h>
+#include <error.h>
+#endif
ngx_os_io_t ngx_io;
@@ -708,6 +711,35 @@
return NGX_OK;
}
+#if(NGX_HAVE_REUSEPORT)
+#if(NGX_HAVE_REUSEPORT_CBPF)
+#ifndef ARRAY_SIZE
+#define ARRAY_SIZE(arr) (sizeof(arr) / sizeof((arr)[0])) #endif
+
+static ngx_int_t attach_bpf(int fd, uint16_t n) {
+ struct sock_filter code[] = {
+ /* A = skb->queue_mapping */
+ { BPF_LD | BPF_W | BPF_ABS, 0, 0, SKF_AD_OFF + SKF_AD_QUEUE },
+ /* A = A % n */
+ { BPF_ALU | BPF_MOD, 0, 0, n },
+ /* return A */
+ { BPF_RET | BPF_A, 0, 0, 0 },
+ };
+ struct sock_fprog p = {
+ .len = ARRAY_SIZE(code),
+ .filter = code,
+ };
+
+ if (setsockopt(fd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_ATTACH_REUSEPORT_CBPF, &p, sizeof(p)))
+ return NGX_ERROR;
+ else
+ return NGX_OK;
+}
+#endif
+#endif
+
void
ngx_configure_listening_sockets(ngx_cycle_t *cycle) @@ -719,6 +751,11 @@ #if
(NGX_HAVE_DEFERRED_ACCEPT && defined SO_ACCEPTFILTER)
struct accept_filter_arg af;
#endif
+#if (NGX_HAVE_REUSEPORT)
+#if (NGX_HAVE_REUSEPORT_CBPF)
+ ngx_core_conf_t* ccf ;
+#endif
+#endif
ls = cycle->listening.elts;
for (i = 0; i < cycle->listening.nelts; i++) { @@ -1011,6 +1048,31 @@
}
#endif
+#if (NGX_HAVE_REUSEPORT)
+#if (NGX_HAVE_REUSEPORT_CBPF)
+ if(ls[i].reuseport)
+ {
+ ccf = (ngx_core_conf_t *)
ngx_get_conf(cycle->conf_ctx,ngx_core_module);
+ if(ccf)
+ {
+ if( NGX_OK == attach_bpf(ls[i].fd, ccf->worker_processes) )
+ {
+ ngx_log_error(NGX_LOG_INFO,cycle->log ,ngx_socket_errno,\
+ "bpf prog attached to fd:%d\n", ls[i].fd);
+ }
+ else
+ {
+ ngx_log_error(NGX_LOG_ERR,cycle->log ,ngx_socket_errno,\
+ "failed to set SO_ATTACH_REUSEPORT_CBPF\n");
+ }
+ }
+ else
+ ngx_log_error(NGX_LOG_ERR,cycle->log ,ngx_socket_errno,\
+ "can not get config, attach bpf failed\n");
+
+ }
+#endif
+#endif
}
return;
-----Original Message-----
From: Liu, Qiao
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2020 10:09 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [PATCH] Use BPF to distribute packet to different work thread.
Below is 5 times test result compare, 112 threads, 10000 connections, 1M object
http request. Seems P99 have great improvement, and Max is also reduced
AVG Stdev Max P99
test 1 1.32s 447.09ms 5.48s 2.82s
BPF test 2 1.39s 513.8ms 9.42s 3.1s
test 3 1.4s 341.38ms 5.63s 2.55s
test 4 1.41s 407.45ms 6.96s 2.77s
test 5 1.29s 644.81ms 9.45s 3.74s
Average 1.362s 470.906ms 7.388s 2.996s
NonBPF test 1 1.48s 916.88ms 9.44s 5.08s
test 2 1.43s 658.48ms 9.54s 3.92s
test 3 1.41s 650.38ms 8.63s 3.59s
test 4 1.29s 1010ms 10s 5.21s
test 5 1.31s 875.01ms 9.53s 4.39s
Average 1.384s 822.15ms 9.428s 4.438s
Thanks
LQ
-----Original Message-----
From: nginx-devel <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Liu, Qiao
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2020 9:18 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: RE: [PATCH] Use BPF to distribute packet to different work thread.
Hi, Maxim Dounin:
Thanks for your reply, this server is random selected, we just do BPF and
no-BPF test, I think the latency based on server configuration, not related
with BPF patch, also the NIC of the server is Mellanox, not ADQ capable
hardware , we will do more test Thanks LQ
-----Original Message-----
From: nginx-devel <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Maxim Dounin
Sent: Monday, September 14, 2020 7:40 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Use BPF to distribute packet to different work thread.
Hello!
On Fri, Sep 11, 2020 at 05:41:47AM +0000, Liu, Qiao wrote:
Hi, Vladimir Homutov:
The below is our WRK test result output with BPF enable
112 threads and 10000 connections
Thread Stats Avg Stdev Max +/- Stdev
Latency 608.23ms 820.71ms 10.00s 87.48%
Connect 16.52ms 54.53ms 1.99s 94.73%
Delay 153.13ms 182.17ms 2.00s 90.74%
Req/Sec 244.79 142.32 1.99k 68.40%
Latency Distribution
50.00% 293.50ms
75.00% 778.33ms
90.00% 1.61s
99.00% 3.71s
99.90% 7.03s
99.99% 8.94s
Connect Distribution
50.00% 1.93ms
75.00% 2.85ms
90.00% 55.76ms
99.00% 229.19ms
99.90% 656.79ms
99.99% 1.43s
Delay Distribution
50.00% 110.96ms
75.00% 193.67ms
90.00% 321.77ms
99.00% 959.27ms
99.90% 1.57s
99.99% 1.91s
Compared with no BPF but enable reuseport as below
112 threads and 10000 connections
Thread Stats Avg Stdev Max +/- Stdev
Latency 680.50ms 943.69ms 10.00s 87.18%
Connect 58.44ms 238.08ms 2.00s 94.58%
Delay 158.84ms 256.28ms 2.00s 90.92%
Req/Sec 244.51 151.00 1.41k 69.67%
Latency Distribution
50.00% 317.61ms
75.00% 913.52ms
90.00% 1.90s
99.00% 4.30s
99.90% 6.52s
99.99% 8.80s
Connect Distribution
50.00% 1.88ms
75.00% 2.21ms
90.00% 55.94ms
99.00% 1.45s
99.90% 1.95s
99.99% 2.00s
Delay Distribution
50.00% 73.01ms
75.00% 190.40ms
90.00% 387.01ms
99.00% 1.34s
99.90% 1.86s
99.99% 1.99s
From the above results, there shows almost 20% percent latency
reduction. P99 latency of BPF is 3.71s , but without BPF is 4.3s.
Thank you for the results.
Given that latency stdev is way higher than the average latency, I don't think the
"20% percent latency reduction" observed is statistically significant. Please
try running several tests and use ministat(1) to check the results.
Also, the latency values look very high, and request rate very low. What's on
the server side?
--
Maxim Dounin
http://mdounin.ru/
_______________________________________________
nginx-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx-devel
_______________________________________________
nginx-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx-devel
_______________________________________________
nginx-devel mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.nginx.org/mailman/listinfo/nginx-devel
