|
|
Re: Heavy spin_lock contention in __udp4_lib_mcast_deliver increase |
On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 11:28 -0500, Shawn Bohrer wrote: > No in this case it is 300 unique multicast addresses, and there is one > socket listening to each multicast address. So a single message is > only copied once to a single socket. The bottle neck appears to be > that even though a single message is only going to get copied to a > single socket we still have to walk the list of all 300 sockets while > holding the spin lock to figure that out. The incoming packet rate is > also roughly evenly distributed across all 300 multicast addresses so > even though we have multiple receive queues they are all contending > for the same spin lock. > I repeat my question : Are these 300 sockets bound to the same UDP port ? If not, they should be spreaded in hash table. You can make this hash table very big to reduce hash collisions Boot parameter : uhash_entries=65536 -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Linux Kernel Discussion] [Ethernet Bridging] [Linux Wireless Networking] [Linux Bluetooth Networking] [Linux Networking Users] [VLAN] [Git] [IETF Annouce] [Linux Assembly] [Security] [Bugtraq] [Photo] [Singles Social Networking] [Yosemite Information] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux Kernel] [ARM Linux] [Linux Virtualization] [Linux Security] [Linux IDE] [Linux RAID] [Linux SCSI] [Free Dating]
![]() |
![]() |