[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [virtio-dev] Re: [virtio-comment] Re: [PATCH v14] virtio-net: support inner header hash
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 03:40:18PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > On Fri, May 26, 2023 at 04:04:18PM +0800, Heng Qi wrote: > > > > > > å 2023/5/23 äå11:58, Heng Qi åé: > > > On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 03:19:16PM -0400, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > > On Mon, May 22, 2023 at 01:02:36PM +0800, Heng Qi wrote: > > > > > 1. Currently, a received encapsulated packet has an outer and an inner header, but > > > > > the virtio device is unable to calculate the hash for the inner header. The same > > > > > flow can traverse through different tunnels, resulting in the encapsulated > > > > > packets being spread across multiple receive queues (refer to the figure below). > > > > > However, in certain scenarios, we may need to direct these encapsulated packets of > > > > > the same flow to a single receive queue. This facilitates the processing > > > > > of the flow by the same CPU to improve performance (warm caches, less locking, etc.). > > > > > > > > > > client1 client2 > > > > > | +-------+ | > > > > > +------->|tunnels|<--------+ > > > > > +-------+ > > > > > | | > > > > > v v > > > > > +-----------------+ > > > > > | monitoring host | > > > > > +-----------------+ > > > > > > > > > > To achieve this, the device can calculate a symmetric hash based on the inner headers > > > > > of the same flow. > > > > > > > > > > 2. For legacy systems, they may lack entropy fields which modern protocols have in > > > > > the outer header, resulting in multiple flows with the same outer header but > > > > > different inner headers being directed to the same receive queue. This results in > > > > > poor receive performance. > > > > > > > > > > To address this limitation, inner header hash can be used to enable the device to advertise > > > > > the capability to calculate the hash for the inner packet, regaining better receive performance. > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Heng Qi <hengqi@linux.alibaba.com> > > > > > Reviewed-by: Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com> > > > > > --- > > > > > v13->v14: > > > > > 1. Move supported_hash_tunnel_types from config space into cvq command. @Parav Pandit > > > > > 2. Rebase to master branch. > > > > > 3. Some minor modifications. > > > > So, I proposed adding a "generic UDP tunnel" option which simply uses UDP source > > > > port for hash. I think it will help us not having to chaise future tunnels as > > > > more and more are added. > > > I agree, but I thought we'd do this in another thread, sorry. > > > Following your suggestion, we should add a field similar to > > > \field{generic_udp_tunnel_option} in the virtnet_hash_tunnel_config_set > > > structure. > > > > > > \field{generic_udp_tunnel_option} should be 0, 1 or 2. > > > > > > \field{hash_tunnel_types} is still useful, but for more general purpose we need > > > to use it together with \field{generic_udp_tunnel_option}. > > > > > > When \field{generic_udp_tunnel_option} is 0, all tunneling protocols included in > > > \field{hash_tunnel_types} use the inner header for hashing. For other tunnel > > > protocols not included in \field{hash_tunnel_types}, the hash is calculated as if > > > VIRTIO_NET_F_TUNNEL_HASH is not negotiated. > > > > > > When \field{generic_udp_tunnel_option} is 1, all tunneling protocols included in > > > \field{hash_tunnel_types} use the inner header for hashing. For other tunnel > > > protocols not included in \field{hash_tunnel_types}, if their outer headers are > > > based on UDP protocol, the device use the outer UDP source port for hashing. > > > For the rest of the tunnel protocols, the hash is calculated as if VIRTIO_NET_F_TUNNEL_HASH > > > was not negotiated. > > > > > > When \field{generic_udp_tunnel_option} is 2, for all UDP tunneling protocols, > > > the outer udp source port is used for hashing, otherwise if the tunneling protocol > > > is included in \field{hash_tunnel_types}, the inner header is used for hashing. > > > For the rest of the tunnel protocols, the hash is calculated as if VIRTIO_NET_F_TUNNEL_HASH > > > was not negotiated. > > > > > > And for this option, we need to add a reminder: > > > Although the \field{generic_udp_tunnel_option} helps us adapt to more new > > > tunneling protocols, it is still an unreliable option, especially for > > > tunneling protocols that use "SHOULD" "Recommended" in their own > > > specifications, because it means the udp source port does not > > > always fully identify a stream. > > > > > > > Hi, Michael. > > > > Do you agree with this plan? Please let me know if you have any comments.:) > > > > If there are no comments, I can start a new version to make progress. > > > > Thanks. > > How are "tunneling protocols" defined though? > > Maybe pass a mask of destination UDP ports for which this applies? > > Then we don't need options, if port is set in mask then > generic udp tunnel inner hash applies. If port is not set then > hash is calculated in some other way, including > one of tunnel specific flags. I admit this is pretty complex though. As an intermediate step I can see two other options: - just do this for all UDP packets assuming most traffic is encapsulated - assume that the list of protocols is configured in the NIC by other means (e.g. hard-coded, or we can add an admin command for this) Thoghts? > > > > > I also suggested dropping some tunnels which are less common and where > > > > the specification is unambiguous enough that source port should include > > > > inner hash. > > > OK, I'll re-screen and update the tunneling protocols we already include > > > (e.g. remove STT since it fits what you said). > > > > > > Thanks. > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: virtio-dev-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: virtio-dev-help@lists.oasis-open.org
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]