On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 7:26 AM Shijie Huang
<shijie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Interesting, how was it measured exactly ?
在 2024/2/20 13:32, Eric Dumazet 写道:
On Tue, Feb 20, 2024 at 3:18 AM Huang ShijieOkay. thanks a lot.
<shijie@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The current code passes NUMA_NO_NODE to __alloc_skb(), we foundThis is intended (WAI)
it may creates fclone SKB in remote NUMA node.
It seems I should fix the issue in other code, not the networking.
What about the NUMA policies of the current thread ?We use "numactl -m 0" for memcached, the NUMA policy should allocate
fclone in
node 0, but we can see many fclones were allocated in node 1.
We have enough memory to allocate these fclones in node 0.
Has NUMA_NO_NODE behavior changed recently?I guess not.
What means : "it may creates" ? Please be more specific.When we use the memcached for testing in NUMA, there are maybe 20% ~ 30%
fclones were allocated in
remote NUMA node.
Are you using SLUB or SLAB ?