Spdk/test/unit/lib/sock/uring.c/uring_ut.c

282 lines
9.1 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

/*-
* BSD LICENSE
*
* Copyright (c) Intel Corporation.
* All rights reserved.
*
* Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
* modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
* are met:
*
* * Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
* notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
* * Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
* notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in
* the documentation and/or other materials provided with the
* distribution.
* * Neither the name of Intel Corporation nor the names of its
* contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived
* from this software without specific prior written permission.
*
* THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS
* "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT
* LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR
* A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT
* OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL,
* SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT
* LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE,
* DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY
* THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT
* (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE
* OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE.
*/
#include "spdk/stdinc.h"
#include "spdk/util.h"
#include "spdk_internal/mock.h"
#include "spdk_cunit.h"
#include "common/lib/test_env.c"
#include "sock/uring/uring.c"
DEFINE_STUB(spdk_sock_map_insert, int, (struct spdk_sock_map *map, int placement_id,
struct spdk_sock_group_impl *group), 0);
DEFINE_STUB_V(spdk_sock_map_release, (struct spdk_sock_map *map, int placement_id));
DEFINE_STUB(spdk_sock_map_lookup, int, (struct spdk_sock_map *map, int placement_id,
struct spdk_sock_group_impl **group, struct spdk_sock_group_impl *hint), 0);
DEFINE_STUB(spdk_sock_map_find_free, int, (struct spdk_sock_map *map), -1);
DEFINE_STUB_V(spdk_sock_map_cleanup, (struct spdk_sock_map *map));
DEFINE_STUB_V(spdk_net_impl_register, (struct spdk_net_impl *impl, int priority));
DEFINE_STUB(spdk_sock_close, int, (struct spdk_sock **s), 0);
DEFINE_STUB(__io_uring_get_cqe, int, (struct io_uring *ring, struct io_uring_cqe **cqe_ptr,
unsigned submit,
unsigned wait_nr, sigset_t *sigmask), 0);
DEFINE_STUB(io_uring_submit, int, (struct io_uring *ring), 0);
DEFINE_STUB(io_uring_get_sqe, struct io_uring_sqe *, (struct io_uring *ring), 0);
DEFINE_STUB(io_uring_queue_init, int, (unsigned entries, struct io_uring *ring, unsigned flags), 0);
DEFINE_STUB_V(io_uring_queue_exit, (struct io_uring *ring));
static void
_req_cb(void *cb_arg, int len)
{
*(bool *)cb_arg = true;
CU_ASSERT(len == 0);
}
static void
flush_client(void)
{
struct spdk_uring_sock_group_impl group = {};
struct spdk_uring_sock usock = {};
struct spdk_sock *sock = &usock.base;
struct spdk_sock_request *req1, *req2;
bool cb_arg1, cb_arg2;
int rc;
/* Set up data structures */
TAILQ_INIT(&sock->queued_reqs);
TAILQ_INIT(&sock->pending_reqs);
sock->group_impl = &group.base;
req1 = calloc(1, sizeof(struct spdk_sock_request) + 3 * sizeof(struct iovec));
SPDK_CU_ASSERT_FATAL(req1 != NULL);
SPDK_SOCK_REQUEST_IOV(req1, 0)->iov_base = (void *)100;
SPDK_SOCK_REQUEST_IOV(req1, 0)->iov_len = 64;
SPDK_SOCK_REQUEST_IOV(req1, 1)->iov_base = (void *)200;
SPDK_SOCK_REQUEST_IOV(req1, 1)->iov_len = 64;
SPDK_SOCK_REQUEST_IOV(req1, 2)->iov_base = (void *)300;
SPDK_SOCK_REQUEST_IOV(req1, 2)->iov_len = 64;
req1->iovcnt = 3;
req1->cb_fn = _req_cb;
req1->cb_arg = &cb_arg1;
req2 = calloc(1, sizeof(struct spdk_sock_request) + 2 * sizeof(struct iovec));
SPDK_CU_ASSERT_FATAL(req2 != NULL);
SPDK_SOCK_REQUEST_IOV(req2, 0)->iov_base = (void *)100;
SPDK_SOCK_REQUEST_IOV(req2, 0)->iov_len = 32;
SPDK_SOCK_REQUEST_IOV(req2, 1)->iov_base = (void *)200;
SPDK_SOCK_REQUEST_IOV(req2, 1)->iov_len = 32;
req2->iovcnt = 2;
req2->cb_fn = _req_cb;
req2->cb_arg = &cb_arg2;
/* Simple test - a request with a 3 element iovec
* that gets submitted in a single sendmsg. */
spdk_sock_request_queue(sock, req1);
MOCK_SET(sendmsg, 192);
cb_arg1 = false;
rc = _sock_flush_client(sock);
CU_ASSERT(rc == 0);
CU_ASSERT(cb_arg1 == true);
CU_ASSERT(TAILQ_EMPTY(&sock->queued_reqs));
/* Two requests, where both can fully send. */
spdk_sock_request_queue(sock, req1);
spdk_sock_request_queue(sock, req2);
MOCK_SET(sendmsg, 256);
cb_arg1 = false;
cb_arg2 = false;
rc = _sock_flush_client(sock);
CU_ASSERT(rc == 0);
CU_ASSERT(cb_arg1 == true);
CU_ASSERT(cb_arg2 == true);
CU_ASSERT(TAILQ_EMPTY(&sock->queued_reqs));
/* Two requests. Only first one can send */
spdk_sock_request_queue(sock, req1);
spdk_sock_request_queue(sock, req2);
MOCK_SET(sendmsg, 192);
cb_arg1 = false;
cb_arg2 = false;
rc = _sock_flush_client(sock);
CU_ASSERT(rc == 0);
CU_ASSERT(cb_arg1 == true);
CU_ASSERT(cb_arg2 == false);
CU_ASSERT(TAILQ_FIRST(&sock->queued_reqs) == req2);
TAILQ_REMOVE(&sock->queued_reqs, req2, internal.link);
CU_ASSERT(TAILQ_EMPTY(&sock->queued_reqs));
/* One request. Partial send. */
spdk_sock_request_queue(sock, req1);
MOCK_SET(sendmsg, 10);
cb_arg1 = false;
rc = _sock_flush_client(sock);
CU_ASSERT(rc == 0);
CU_ASSERT(cb_arg1 == false);
CU_ASSERT(TAILQ_FIRST(&sock->queued_reqs) == req1);
/* Do a second flush that partial sends again. */
MOCK_SET(sendmsg, 52);
cb_arg1 = false;
rc = _sock_flush_client(sock);
CU_ASSERT(rc == 0);
CU_ASSERT(cb_arg1 == false);
CU_ASSERT(TAILQ_FIRST(&sock->queued_reqs) == req1);
/* Flush the rest of the data */
MOCK_SET(sendmsg, 130);
cb_arg1 = false;
rc = _sock_flush_client(sock);
CU_ASSERT(rc == 0);
CU_ASSERT(cb_arg1 == true);
CU_ASSERT(TAILQ_EMPTY(&sock->queued_reqs));
free(req1);
free(req2);
}
static void
flush_server(void)
{
struct spdk_uring_sock_group_impl group = {};
struct spdk_uring_sock usock = {};
struct spdk_sock *sock = &usock.base;
struct spdk_sock_request *req1, *req2;
bool cb_arg1, cb_arg2;
int rc;
/* Set up data structures */
TAILQ_INIT(&sock->queued_reqs);
TAILQ_INIT(&sock->pending_reqs);
sock->group_impl = &group.base;
usock.write_task.sock = &usock;
usock.group = &group;
req1 = calloc(1, sizeof(struct spdk_sock_request) + 2 * sizeof(struct iovec));
SPDK_CU_ASSERT_FATAL(req1 != NULL);
SPDK_SOCK_REQUEST_IOV(req1, 0)->iov_base = (void *)100;
SPDK_SOCK_REQUEST_IOV(req1, 0)->iov_len = 64;
SPDK_SOCK_REQUEST_IOV(req1, 1)->iov_base = (void *)200;
SPDK_SOCK_REQUEST_IOV(req1, 1)->iov_len = 64;
req1->iovcnt = 2;
req1->cb_fn = _req_cb;
req1->cb_arg = &cb_arg1;
req2 = calloc(1, sizeof(struct spdk_sock_request) + 2 * sizeof(struct iovec));
SPDK_CU_ASSERT_FATAL(req2 != NULL);
SPDK_SOCK_REQUEST_IOV(req2, 0)->iov_base = (void *)100;
SPDK_SOCK_REQUEST_IOV(req2, 0)->iov_len = 32;
SPDK_SOCK_REQUEST_IOV(req2, 1)->iov_base = (void *)200;
SPDK_SOCK_REQUEST_IOV(req2, 1)->iov_len = 32;
req2->iovcnt = 2;
req2->cb_fn = _req_cb;
req2->cb_arg = &cb_arg2;
/* we should not call _sock_flush directly, since it will finally
* call liburing related functions */
/* Simple test - a request with a 2 element iovec
* that is fully completed. */
spdk_sock_request_queue(sock, req1);
cb_arg1 = false;
sock: introduce dynamic zerocopy according to data size MSG_ZEROCOPY is not always effective as mentioned in https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.15/networking/msg_zerocopy.html. Currently in spdk, once we enable sendmsg zerocopy, then all data transferred through _sock_flush are sent with zerocopy, and vice versa. Here dynamic zerocopy is introduced to allow data sent with MSG_ZEROCOPY or not according to its size, which can be enabled by setting "enable_dynamic_zerocopy" as true. Test with 16 P4610 NVMe SSD, 2 initiators, target's and initiators' configurations are the same as spdk report: https://ci.spdk.io/download/performance-reports/SPDK_tcp_perf_report_2104.pdf For posix socket, rw_percent=0(randwrite), it has 1.9%~8.3% performance boost tested with target 1~40 cpu cores and qdepth=128,256,512. And it has no obvious influence when read percentage is greater than 50%. For uring socket, rw_percent=0(randwrite), it has 1.8%~7.9% performance boost tested with target 1~40 cpu cores and qdepth=128,256,512. And it still has 1%~7% improvement when read percentage is greater than 50%. The following is part of the detailed data. posix: qdepth=128 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 286.5 298.5 4.19% 307 304.15 -0.93% 4 1042.5 1107 6.19% 1135.5 1136 0.04% 8 1952.5 2058 5.40% 2170.5 2170.5 0.00% 12 2658.5 2879 8.29% 3042 3046 0.13% 16 3247.5 3460.5 6.56% 3793.5 3775 -0.49% 24 4232.5 4459.5 5.36% 4614.5 4756.5 3.08% 32 4810 5095 5.93% 4488 4845 7.95% 40 5306.5 5435 2.42% 4427.5 4902 10.72% qdepth=512 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 275 287 4.36% 294.4 295.45 0.36% 4 979 1041 6.33% 1073 1083.5 0.98% 8 1822.5 1914.5 5.05% 2030.5 2018.5 -0.59% 12 2441 2598.5 6.45% 2808.5 2779.5 -1.03% 16 2920.5 3109.5 6.47% 3455 3411.5 -1.26% 24 3709 3972.5 7.10% 4483.5 4502.5 0.42% 32 4225.5 4532.5 7.27% 4463.5 4733 6.04% 40 4790.5 4884.5 1.96% 4427 4904.5 10.79% uring: qdepth=128 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 270.5 287.5 6.28% 295.75 304.75 3.04% 4 1018.5 1089.5 6.97% 1119.5 1156.5 3.31% 8 1907 2055 7.76% 2127 2211.5 3.97% 12 2614 2801 7.15% 2982.5 3061.5 2.65% 16 3169.5 3420 7.90% 3654.5 3781.5 3.48% 24 4109.5 4414 7.41% 4691.5 4750.5 1.26% 32 4752.5 4908 3.27% 4494 4825.5 7.38% 40 5233.5 5327 1.79% 4374.5 4891 11.81% qdepth=512 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 259.95 276 6.17% 286.65 294.8 2.84% 4 955 1021 6.91% 1070.5 1100 2.76% 8 1772 1903.5 7.42% 1992.5 2077.5 4.27% 12 2380.5 2543.5 6.85% 2752.5 2860 3.91% 16 2920.5 3099 6.11% 3391.5 3540 4.38% 24 3697 3912 5.82% 4401 4637 5.36% 32 4256.5 4454.5 4.65% 4516 4777 5.78% 40 4707 4968.5 5.56% 4400.5 4933 12.10% Signed-off-by: Richael Zhuang <richael.zhuang@arm.com> Change-Id: I730dcf89ed2bf3efe91586421a89045fc11c81f0 Reviewed-on: https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/12210 Community-CI: Broadcom CI <spdk-ci.pdl@broadcom.com> Community-CI: Mellanox Build Bot Tested-by: SPDK CI Jenkins <sys_sgci@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Aleksey Marchuk <alexeymar@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Ben Walker <benjamin.walker@intel.com>
2021-12-07 09:37:02 +00:00
rc = spdk_sock_prep_reqs(sock, usock.write_task.iovs, 0, NULL, NULL);
CU_ASSERT(rc == 2);
sock: introduce dynamic zerocopy according to data size MSG_ZEROCOPY is not always effective as mentioned in https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.15/networking/msg_zerocopy.html. Currently in spdk, once we enable sendmsg zerocopy, then all data transferred through _sock_flush are sent with zerocopy, and vice versa. Here dynamic zerocopy is introduced to allow data sent with MSG_ZEROCOPY or not according to its size, which can be enabled by setting "enable_dynamic_zerocopy" as true. Test with 16 P4610 NVMe SSD, 2 initiators, target's and initiators' configurations are the same as spdk report: https://ci.spdk.io/download/performance-reports/SPDK_tcp_perf_report_2104.pdf For posix socket, rw_percent=0(randwrite), it has 1.9%~8.3% performance boost tested with target 1~40 cpu cores and qdepth=128,256,512. And it has no obvious influence when read percentage is greater than 50%. For uring socket, rw_percent=0(randwrite), it has 1.8%~7.9% performance boost tested with target 1~40 cpu cores and qdepth=128,256,512. And it still has 1%~7% improvement when read percentage is greater than 50%. The following is part of the detailed data. posix: qdepth=128 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 286.5 298.5 4.19% 307 304.15 -0.93% 4 1042.5 1107 6.19% 1135.5 1136 0.04% 8 1952.5 2058 5.40% 2170.5 2170.5 0.00% 12 2658.5 2879 8.29% 3042 3046 0.13% 16 3247.5 3460.5 6.56% 3793.5 3775 -0.49% 24 4232.5 4459.5 5.36% 4614.5 4756.5 3.08% 32 4810 5095 5.93% 4488 4845 7.95% 40 5306.5 5435 2.42% 4427.5 4902 10.72% qdepth=512 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 275 287 4.36% 294.4 295.45 0.36% 4 979 1041 6.33% 1073 1083.5 0.98% 8 1822.5 1914.5 5.05% 2030.5 2018.5 -0.59% 12 2441 2598.5 6.45% 2808.5 2779.5 -1.03% 16 2920.5 3109.5 6.47% 3455 3411.5 -1.26% 24 3709 3972.5 7.10% 4483.5 4502.5 0.42% 32 4225.5 4532.5 7.27% 4463.5 4733 6.04% 40 4790.5 4884.5 1.96% 4427 4904.5 10.79% uring: qdepth=128 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 270.5 287.5 6.28% 295.75 304.75 3.04% 4 1018.5 1089.5 6.97% 1119.5 1156.5 3.31% 8 1907 2055 7.76% 2127 2211.5 3.97% 12 2614 2801 7.15% 2982.5 3061.5 2.65% 16 3169.5 3420 7.90% 3654.5 3781.5 3.48% 24 4109.5 4414 7.41% 4691.5 4750.5 1.26% 32 4752.5 4908 3.27% 4494 4825.5 7.38% 40 5233.5 5327 1.79% 4374.5 4891 11.81% qdepth=512 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 259.95 276 6.17% 286.65 294.8 2.84% 4 955 1021 6.91% 1070.5 1100 2.76% 8 1772 1903.5 7.42% 1992.5 2077.5 4.27% 12 2380.5 2543.5 6.85% 2752.5 2860 3.91% 16 2920.5 3099 6.11% 3391.5 3540 4.38% 24 3697 3912 5.82% 4401 4637 5.36% 32 4256.5 4454.5 4.65% 4516 4777 5.78% 40 4707 4968.5 5.56% 4400.5 4933 12.10% Signed-off-by: Richael Zhuang <richael.zhuang@arm.com> Change-Id: I730dcf89ed2bf3efe91586421a89045fc11c81f0 Reviewed-on: https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/12210 Community-CI: Broadcom CI <spdk-ci.pdl@broadcom.com> Community-CI: Mellanox Build Bot Tested-by: SPDK CI Jenkins <sys_sgci@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Aleksey Marchuk <alexeymar@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Ben Walker <benjamin.walker@intel.com>
2021-12-07 09:37:02 +00:00
sock_complete_reqs(sock, 128, 0);
CU_ASSERT(cb_arg1 == true);
CU_ASSERT(TAILQ_EMPTY(&sock->queued_reqs));
/* Two requests, where both can be fully completed. */
spdk_sock_request_queue(sock, req1);
spdk_sock_request_queue(sock, req2);
cb_arg1 = false;
cb_arg2 = false;
sock: introduce dynamic zerocopy according to data size MSG_ZEROCOPY is not always effective as mentioned in https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.15/networking/msg_zerocopy.html. Currently in spdk, once we enable sendmsg zerocopy, then all data transferred through _sock_flush are sent with zerocopy, and vice versa. Here dynamic zerocopy is introduced to allow data sent with MSG_ZEROCOPY or not according to its size, which can be enabled by setting "enable_dynamic_zerocopy" as true. Test with 16 P4610 NVMe SSD, 2 initiators, target's and initiators' configurations are the same as spdk report: https://ci.spdk.io/download/performance-reports/SPDK_tcp_perf_report_2104.pdf For posix socket, rw_percent=0(randwrite), it has 1.9%~8.3% performance boost tested with target 1~40 cpu cores and qdepth=128,256,512. And it has no obvious influence when read percentage is greater than 50%. For uring socket, rw_percent=0(randwrite), it has 1.8%~7.9% performance boost tested with target 1~40 cpu cores and qdepth=128,256,512. And it still has 1%~7% improvement when read percentage is greater than 50%. The following is part of the detailed data. posix: qdepth=128 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 286.5 298.5 4.19% 307 304.15 -0.93% 4 1042.5 1107 6.19% 1135.5 1136 0.04% 8 1952.5 2058 5.40% 2170.5 2170.5 0.00% 12 2658.5 2879 8.29% 3042 3046 0.13% 16 3247.5 3460.5 6.56% 3793.5 3775 -0.49% 24 4232.5 4459.5 5.36% 4614.5 4756.5 3.08% 32 4810 5095 5.93% 4488 4845 7.95% 40 5306.5 5435 2.42% 4427.5 4902 10.72% qdepth=512 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 275 287 4.36% 294.4 295.45 0.36% 4 979 1041 6.33% 1073 1083.5 0.98% 8 1822.5 1914.5 5.05% 2030.5 2018.5 -0.59% 12 2441 2598.5 6.45% 2808.5 2779.5 -1.03% 16 2920.5 3109.5 6.47% 3455 3411.5 -1.26% 24 3709 3972.5 7.10% 4483.5 4502.5 0.42% 32 4225.5 4532.5 7.27% 4463.5 4733 6.04% 40 4790.5 4884.5 1.96% 4427 4904.5 10.79% uring: qdepth=128 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 270.5 287.5 6.28% 295.75 304.75 3.04% 4 1018.5 1089.5 6.97% 1119.5 1156.5 3.31% 8 1907 2055 7.76% 2127 2211.5 3.97% 12 2614 2801 7.15% 2982.5 3061.5 2.65% 16 3169.5 3420 7.90% 3654.5 3781.5 3.48% 24 4109.5 4414 7.41% 4691.5 4750.5 1.26% 32 4752.5 4908 3.27% 4494 4825.5 7.38% 40 5233.5 5327 1.79% 4374.5 4891 11.81% qdepth=512 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 259.95 276 6.17% 286.65 294.8 2.84% 4 955 1021 6.91% 1070.5 1100 2.76% 8 1772 1903.5 7.42% 1992.5 2077.5 4.27% 12 2380.5 2543.5 6.85% 2752.5 2860 3.91% 16 2920.5 3099 6.11% 3391.5 3540 4.38% 24 3697 3912 5.82% 4401 4637 5.36% 32 4256.5 4454.5 4.65% 4516 4777 5.78% 40 4707 4968.5 5.56% 4400.5 4933 12.10% Signed-off-by: Richael Zhuang <richael.zhuang@arm.com> Change-Id: I730dcf89ed2bf3efe91586421a89045fc11c81f0 Reviewed-on: https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/12210 Community-CI: Broadcom CI <spdk-ci.pdl@broadcom.com> Community-CI: Mellanox Build Bot Tested-by: SPDK CI Jenkins <sys_sgci@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Aleksey Marchuk <alexeymar@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Ben Walker <benjamin.walker@intel.com>
2021-12-07 09:37:02 +00:00
rc = spdk_sock_prep_reqs(sock, usock.write_task.iovs, 0, NULL, NULL);
CU_ASSERT(rc == 4);
sock: introduce dynamic zerocopy according to data size MSG_ZEROCOPY is not always effective as mentioned in https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.15/networking/msg_zerocopy.html. Currently in spdk, once we enable sendmsg zerocopy, then all data transferred through _sock_flush are sent with zerocopy, and vice versa. Here dynamic zerocopy is introduced to allow data sent with MSG_ZEROCOPY or not according to its size, which can be enabled by setting "enable_dynamic_zerocopy" as true. Test with 16 P4610 NVMe SSD, 2 initiators, target's and initiators' configurations are the same as spdk report: https://ci.spdk.io/download/performance-reports/SPDK_tcp_perf_report_2104.pdf For posix socket, rw_percent=0(randwrite), it has 1.9%~8.3% performance boost tested with target 1~40 cpu cores and qdepth=128,256,512. And it has no obvious influence when read percentage is greater than 50%. For uring socket, rw_percent=0(randwrite), it has 1.8%~7.9% performance boost tested with target 1~40 cpu cores and qdepth=128,256,512. And it still has 1%~7% improvement when read percentage is greater than 50%. The following is part of the detailed data. posix: qdepth=128 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 286.5 298.5 4.19% 307 304.15 -0.93% 4 1042.5 1107 6.19% 1135.5 1136 0.04% 8 1952.5 2058 5.40% 2170.5 2170.5 0.00% 12 2658.5 2879 8.29% 3042 3046 0.13% 16 3247.5 3460.5 6.56% 3793.5 3775 -0.49% 24 4232.5 4459.5 5.36% 4614.5 4756.5 3.08% 32 4810 5095 5.93% 4488 4845 7.95% 40 5306.5 5435 2.42% 4427.5 4902 10.72% qdepth=512 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 275 287 4.36% 294.4 295.45 0.36% 4 979 1041 6.33% 1073 1083.5 0.98% 8 1822.5 1914.5 5.05% 2030.5 2018.5 -0.59% 12 2441 2598.5 6.45% 2808.5 2779.5 -1.03% 16 2920.5 3109.5 6.47% 3455 3411.5 -1.26% 24 3709 3972.5 7.10% 4483.5 4502.5 0.42% 32 4225.5 4532.5 7.27% 4463.5 4733 6.04% 40 4790.5 4884.5 1.96% 4427 4904.5 10.79% uring: qdepth=128 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 270.5 287.5 6.28% 295.75 304.75 3.04% 4 1018.5 1089.5 6.97% 1119.5 1156.5 3.31% 8 1907 2055 7.76% 2127 2211.5 3.97% 12 2614 2801 7.15% 2982.5 3061.5 2.65% 16 3169.5 3420 7.90% 3654.5 3781.5 3.48% 24 4109.5 4414 7.41% 4691.5 4750.5 1.26% 32 4752.5 4908 3.27% 4494 4825.5 7.38% 40 5233.5 5327 1.79% 4374.5 4891 11.81% qdepth=512 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 259.95 276 6.17% 286.65 294.8 2.84% 4 955 1021 6.91% 1070.5 1100 2.76% 8 1772 1903.5 7.42% 1992.5 2077.5 4.27% 12 2380.5 2543.5 6.85% 2752.5 2860 3.91% 16 2920.5 3099 6.11% 3391.5 3540 4.38% 24 3697 3912 5.82% 4401 4637 5.36% 32 4256.5 4454.5 4.65% 4516 4777 5.78% 40 4707 4968.5 5.56% 4400.5 4933 12.10% Signed-off-by: Richael Zhuang <richael.zhuang@arm.com> Change-Id: I730dcf89ed2bf3efe91586421a89045fc11c81f0 Reviewed-on: https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/12210 Community-CI: Broadcom CI <spdk-ci.pdl@broadcom.com> Community-CI: Mellanox Build Bot Tested-by: SPDK CI Jenkins <sys_sgci@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Aleksey Marchuk <alexeymar@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Ben Walker <benjamin.walker@intel.com>
2021-12-07 09:37:02 +00:00
sock_complete_reqs(sock, 192, 0);
CU_ASSERT(cb_arg1 == true);
CU_ASSERT(cb_arg2 == true);
CU_ASSERT(TAILQ_EMPTY(&sock->queued_reqs));
/* One request that is partially sent. */
spdk_sock_request_queue(sock, req1);
cb_arg1 = false;
sock: introduce dynamic zerocopy according to data size MSG_ZEROCOPY is not always effective as mentioned in https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.15/networking/msg_zerocopy.html. Currently in spdk, once we enable sendmsg zerocopy, then all data transferred through _sock_flush are sent with zerocopy, and vice versa. Here dynamic zerocopy is introduced to allow data sent with MSG_ZEROCOPY or not according to its size, which can be enabled by setting "enable_dynamic_zerocopy" as true. Test with 16 P4610 NVMe SSD, 2 initiators, target's and initiators' configurations are the same as spdk report: https://ci.spdk.io/download/performance-reports/SPDK_tcp_perf_report_2104.pdf For posix socket, rw_percent=0(randwrite), it has 1.9%~8.3% performance boost tested with target 1~40 cpu cores and qdepth=128,256,512. And it has no obvious influence when read percentage is greater than 50%. For uring socket, rw_percent=0(randwrite), it has 1.8%~7.9% performance boost tested with target 1~40 cpu cores and qdepth=128,256,512. And it still has 1%~7% improvement when read percentage is greater than 50%. The following is part of the detailed data. posix: qdepth=128 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 286.5 298.5 4.19% 307 304.15 -0.93% 4 1042.5 1107 6.19% 1135.5 1136 0.04% 8 1952.5 2058 5.40% 2170.5 2170.5 0.00% 12 2658.5 2879 8.29% 3042 3046 0.13% 16 3247.5 3460.5 6.56% 3793.5 3775 -0.49% 24 4232.5 4459.5 5.36% 4614.5 4756.5 3.08% 32 4810 5095 5.93% 4488 4845 7.95% 40 5306.5 5435 2.42% 4427.5 4902 10.72% qdepth=512 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 275 287 4.36% 294.4 295.45 0.36% 4 979 1041 6.33% 1073 1083.5 0.98% 8 1822.5 1914.5 5.05% 2030.5 2018.5 -0.59% 12 2441 2598.5 6.45% 2808.5 2779.5 -1.03% 16 2920.5 3109.5 6.47% 3455 3411.5 -1.26% 24 3709 3972.5 7.10% 4483.5 4502.5 0.42% 32 4225.5 4532.5 7.27% 4463.5 4733 6.04% 40 4790.5 4884.5 1.96% 4427 4904.5 10.79% uring: qdepth=128 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 270.5 287.5 6.28% 295.75 304.75 3.04% 4 1018.5 1089.5 6.97% 1119.5 1156.5 3.31% 8 1907 2055 7.76% 2127 2211.5 3.97% 12 2614 2801 7.15% 2982.5 3061.5 2.65% 16 3169.5 3420 7.90% 3654.5 3781.5 3.48% 24 4109.5 4414 7.41% 4691.5 4750.5 1.26% 32 4752.5 4908 3.27% 4494 4825.5 7.38% 40 5233.5 5327 1.79% 4374.5 4891 11.81% qdepth=512 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 259.95 276 6.17% 286.65 294.8 2.84% 4 955 1021 6.91% 1070.5 1100 2.76% 8 1772 1903.5 7.42% 1992.5 2077.5 4.27% 12 2380.5 2543.5 6.85% 2752.5 2860 3.91% 16 2920.5 3099 6.11% 3391.5 3540 4.38% 24 3697 3912 5.82% 4401 4637 5.36% 32 4256.5 4454.5 4.65% 4516 4777 5.78% 40 4707 4968.5 5.56% 4400.5 4933 12.10% Signed-off-by: Richael Zhuang <richael.zhuang@arm.com> Change-Id: I730dcf89ed2bf3efe91586421a89045fc11c81f0 Reviewed-on: https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/12210 Community-CI: Broadcom CI <spdk-ci.pdl@broadcom.com> Community-CI: Mellanox Build Bot Tested-by: SPDK CI Jenkins <sys_sgci@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Aleksey Marchuk <alexeymar@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Ben Walker <benjamin.walker@intel.com>
2021-12-07 09:37:02 +00:00
rc = spdk_sock_prep_reqs(sock, usock.write_task.iovs, 0, NULL, NULL);
CU_ASSERT(rc == 2);
sock: introduce dynamic zerocopy according to data size MSG_ZEROCOPY is not always effective as mentioned in https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.15/networking/msg_zerocopy.html. Currently in spdk, once we enable sendmsg zerocopy, then all data transferred through _sock_flush are sent with zerocopy, and vice versa. Here dynamic zerocopy is introduced to allow data sent with MSG_ZEROCOPY or not according to its size, which can be enabled by setting "enable_dynamic_zerocopy" as true. Test with 16 P4610 NVMe SSD, 2 initiators, target's and initiators' configurations are the same as spdk report: https://ci.spdk.io/download/performance-reports/SPDK_tcp_perf_report_2104.pdf For posix socket, rw_percent=0(randwrite), it has 1.9%~8.3% performance boost tested with target 1~40 cpu cores and qdepth=128,256,512. And it has no obvious influence when read percentage is greater than 50%. For uring socket, rw_percent=0(randwrite), it has 1.8%~7.9% performance boost tested with target 1~40 cpu cores and qdepth=128,256,512. And it still has 1%~7% improvement when read percentage is greater than 50%. The following is part of the detailed data. posix: qdepth=128 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 286.5 298.5 4.19% 307 304.15 -0.93% 4 1042.5 1107 6.19% 1135.5 1136 0.04% 8 1952.5 2058 5.40% 2170.5 2170.5 0.00% 12 2658.5 2879 8.29% 3042 3046 0.13% 16 3247.5 3460.5 6.56% 3793.5 3775 -0.49% 24 4232.5 4459.5 5.36% 4614.5 4756.5 3.08% 32 4810 5095 5.93% 4488 4845 7.95% 40 5306.5 5435 2.42% 4427.5 4902 10.72% qdepth=512 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 275 287 4.36% 294.4 295.45 0.36% 4 979 1041 6.33% 1073 1083.5 0.98% 8 1822.5 1914.5 5.05% 2030.5 2018.5 -0.59% 12 2441 2598.5 6.45% 2808.5 2779.5 -1.03% 16 2920.5 3109.5 6.47% 3455 3411.5 -1.26% 24 3709 3972.5 7.10% 4483.5 4502.5 0.42% 32 4225.5 4532.5 7.27% 4463.5 4733 6.04% 40 4790.5 4884.5 1.96% 4427 4904.5 10.79% uring: qdepth=128 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 270.5 287.5 6.28% 295.75 304.75 3.04% 4 1018.5 1089.5 6.97% 1119.5 1156.5 3.31% 8 1907 2055 7.76% 2127 2211.5 3.97% 12 2614 2801 7.15% 2982.5 3061.5 2.65% 16 3169.5 3420 7.90% 3654.5 3781.5 3.48% 24 4109.5 4414 7.41% 4691.5 4750.5 1.26% 32 4752.5 4908 3.27% 4494 4825.5 7.38% 40 5233.5 5327 1.79% 4374.5 4891 11.81% qdepth=512 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 259.95 276 6.17% 286.65 294.8 2.84% 4 955 1021 6.91% 1070.5 1100 2.76% 8 1772 1903.5 7.42% 1992.5 2077.5 4.27% 12 2380.5 2543.5 6.85% 2752.5 2860 3.91% 16 2920.5 3099 6.11% 3391.5 3540 4.38% 24 3697 3912 5.82% 4401 4637 5.36% 32 4256.5 4454.5 4.65% 4516 4777 5.78% 40 4707 4968.5 5.56% 4400.5 4933 12.10% Signed-off-by: Richael Zhuang <richael.zhuang@arm.com> Change-Id: I730dcf89ed2bf3efe91586421a89045fc11c81f0 Reviewed-on: https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/12210 Community-CI: Broadcom CI <spdk-ci.pdl@broadcom.com> Community-CI: Mellanox Build Bot Tested-by: SPDK CI Jenkins <sys_sgci@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Aleksey Marchuk <alexeymar@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Ben Walker <benjamin.walker@intel.com>
2021-12-07 09:37:02 +00:00
sock_complete_reqs(sock, 92, 0);
CU_ASSERT(rc == 2);
CU_ASSERT(cb_arg1 == false);
CU_ASSERT(TAILQ_FIRST(&sock->queued_reqs) == req1);
/* Get the second time partial sent result. */
sock: introduce dynamic zerocopy according to data size MSG_ZEROCOPY is not always effective as mentioned in https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.15/networking/msg_zerocopy.html. Currently in spdk, once we enable sendmsg zerocopy, then all data transferred through _sock_flush are sent with zerocopy, and vice versa. Here dynamic zerocopy is introduced to allow data sent with MSG_ZEROCOPY or not according to its size, which can be enabled by setting "enable_dynamic_zerocopy" as true. Test with 16 P4610 NVMe SSD, 2 initiators, target's and initiators' configurations are the same as spdk report: https://ci.spdk.io/download/performance-reports/SPDK_tcp_perf_report_2104.pdf For posix socket, rw_percent=0(randwrite), it has 1.9%~8.3% performance boost tested with target 1~40 cpu cores and qdepth=128,256,512. And it has no obvious influence when read percentage is greater than 50%. For uring socket, rw_percent=0(randwrite), it has 1.8%~7.9% performance boost tested with target 1~40 cpu cores and qdepth=128,256,512. And it still has 1%~7% improvement when read percentage is greater than 50%. The following is part of the detailed data. posix: qdepth=128 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 286.5 298.5 4.19% 307 304.15 -0.93% 4 1042.5 1107 6.19% 1135.5 1136 0.04% 8 1952.5 2058 5.40% 2170.5 2170.5 0.00% 12 2658.5 2879 8.29% 3042 3046 0.13% 16 3247.5 3460.5 6.56% 3793.5 3775 -0.49% 24 4232.5 4459.5 5.36% 4614.5 4756.5 3.08% 32 4810 5095 5.93% 4488 4845 7.95% 40 5306.5 5435 2.42% 4427.5 4902 10.72% qdepth=512 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 275 287 4.36% 294.4 295.45 0.36% 4 979 1041 6.33% 1073 1083.5 0.98% 8 1822.5 1914.5 5.05% 2030.5 2018.5 -0.59% 12 2441 2598.5 6.45% 2808.5 2779.5 -1.03% 16 2920.5 3109.5 6.47% 3455 3411.5 -1.26% 24 3709 3972.5 7.10% 4483.5 4502.5 0.42% 32 4225.5 4532.5 7.27% 4463.5 4733 6.04% 40 4790.5 4884.5 1.96% 4427 4904.5 10.79% uring: qdepth=128 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 270.5 287.5 6.28% 295.75 304.75 3.04% 4 1018.5 1089.5 6.97% 1119.5 1156.5 3.31% 8 1907 2055 7.76% 2127 2211.5 3.97% 12 2614 2801 7.15% 2982.5 3061.5 2.65% 16 3169.5 3420 7.90% 3654.5 3781.5 3.48% 24 4109.5 4414 7.41% 4691.5 4750.5 1.26% 32 4752.5 4908 3.27% 4494 4825.5 7.38% 40 5233.5 5327 1.79% 4374.5 4891 11.81% qdepth=512 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 259.95 276 6.17% 286.65 294.8 2.84% 4 955 1021 6.91% 1070.5 1100 2.76% 8 1772 1903.5 7.42% 1992.5 2077.5 4.27% 12 2380.5 2543.5 6.85% 2752.5 2860 3.91% 16 2920.5 3099 6.11% 3391.5 3540 4.38% 24 3697 3912 5.82% 4401 4637 5.36% 32 4256.5 4454.5 4.65% 4516 4777 5.78% 40 4707 4968.5 5.56% 4400.5 4933 12.10% Signed-off-by: Richael Zhuang <richael.zhuang@arm.com> Change-Id: I730dcf89ed2bf3efe91586421a89045fc11c81f0 Reviewed-on: https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/12210 Community-CI: Broadcom CI <spdk-ci.pdl@broadcom.com> Community-CI: Mellanox Build Bot Tested-by: SPDK CI Jenkins <sys_sgci@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Aleksey Marchuk <alexeymar@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Ben Walker <benjamin.walker@intel.com>
2021-12-07 09:37:02 +00:00
sock_complete_reqs(sock, 10, 0);
CU_ASSERT(cb_arg1 == false);
CU_ASSERT(TAILQ_FIRST(&sock->queued_reqs) == req1);
/* Data is finally sent. */
sock: introduce dynamic zerocopy according to data size MSG_ZEROCOPY is not always effective as mentioned in https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/v4.15/networking/msg_zerocopy.html. Currently in spdk, once we enable sendmsg zerocopy, then all data transferred through _sock_flush are sent with zerocopy, and vice versa. Here dynamic zerocopy is introduced to allow data sent with MSG_ZEROCOPY or not according to its size, which can be enabled by setting "enable_dynamic_zerocopy" as true. Test with 16 P4610 NVMe SSD, 2 initiators, target's and initiators' configurations are the same as spdk report: https://ci.spdk.io/download/performance-reports/SPDK_tcp_perf_report_2104.pdf For posix socket, rw_percent=0(randwrite), it has 1.9%~8.3% performance boost tested with target 1~40 cpu cores and qdepth=128,256,512. And it has no obvious influence when read percentage is greater than 50%. For uring socket, rw_percent=0(randwrite), it has 1.8%~7.9% performance boost tested with target 1~40 cpu cores and qdepth=128,256,512. And it still has 1%~7% improvement when read percentage is greater than 50%. The following is part of the detailed data. posix: qdepth=128 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 286.5 298.5 4.19% 307 304.15 -0.93% 4 1042.5 1107 6.19% 1135.5 1136 0.04% 8 1952.5 2058 5.40% 2170.5 2170.5 0.00% 12 2658.5 2879 8.29% 3042 3046 0.13% 16 3247.5 3460.5 6.56% 3793.5 3775 -0.49% 24 4232.5 4459.5 5.36% 4614.5 4756.5 3.08% 32 4810 5095 5.93% 4488 4845 7.95% 40 5306.5 5435 2.42% 4427.5 4902 10.72% qdepth=512 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 275 287 4.36% 294.4 295.45 0.36% 4 979 1041 6.33% 1073 1083.5 0.98% 8 1822.5 1914.5 5.05% 2030.5 2018.5 -0.59% 12 2441 2598.5 6.45% 2808.5 2779.5 -1.03% 16 2920.5 3109.5 6.47% 3455 3411.5 -1.26% 24 3709 3972.5 7.10% 4483.5 4502.5 0.42% 32 4225.5 4532.5 7.27% 4463.5 4733 6.04% 40 4790.5 4884.5 1.96% 4427 4904.5 10.79% uring: qdepth=128 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 270.5 287.5 6.28% 295.75 304.75 3.04% 4 1018.5 1089.5 6.97% 1119.5 1156.5 3.31% 8 1907 2055 7.76% 2127 2211.5 3.97% 12 2614 2801 7.15% 2982.5 3061.5 2.65% 16 3169.5 3420 7.90% 3654.5 3781.5 3.48% 24 4109.5 4414 7.41% 4691.5 4750.5 1.26% 32 4752.5 4908 3.27% 4494 4825.5 7.38% 40 5233.5 5327 1.79% 4374.5 4891 11.81% qdepth=512 rw_percent 0 | 30 cpu origin thisPatch opt | origin thisPatch opt 1 259.95 276 6.17% 286.65 294.8 2.84% 4 955 1021 6.91% 1070.5 1100 2.76% 8 1772 1903.5 7.42% 1992.5 2077.5 4.27% 12 2380.5 2543.5 6.85% 2752.5 2860 3.91% 16 2920.5 3099 6.11% 3391.5 3540 4.38% 24 3697 3912 5.82% 4401 4637 5.36% 32 4256.5 4454.5 4.65% 4516 4777 5.78% 40 4707 4968.5 5.56% 4400.5 4933 12.10% Signed-off-by: Richael Zhuang <richael.zhuang@arm.com> Change-Id: I730dcf89ed2bf3efe91586421a89045fc11c81f0 Reviewed-on: https://review.spdk.io/gerrit/c/spdk/spdk/+/12210 Community-CI: Broadcom CI <spdk-ci.pdl@broadcom.com> Community-CI: Mellanox Build Bot Tested-by: SPDK CI Jenkins <sys_sgci@intel.com> Reviewed-by: Aleksey Marchuk <alexeymar@nvidia.com> Reviewed-by: Ben Walker <benjamin.walker@intel.com>
2021-12-07 09:37:02 +00:00
sock_complete_reqs(sock, 26, 0);
CU_ASSERT(cb_arg1 == true);
CU_ASSERT(TAILQ_EMPTY(&sock->queued_reqs));
free(req1);
free(req2);
}
int
main(int argc, char **argv)
{
CU_pSuite suite = NULL;
unsigned int num_failures;
CU_set_error_action(CUEA_ABORT);
CU_initialize_registry();
suite = CU_add_suite("uring", NULL, NULL);
CU_ADD_TEST(suite, flush_client);
CU_ADD_TEST(suite, flush_server);
CU_basic_set_mode(CU_BRM_VERBOSE);
CU_basic_run_tests();
num_failures = CU_get_number_of_failures();
CU_cleanup_registry();
return num_failures;
}