On Mon, Oct 7, 2019 at 11:18 PM Sridhar Samudrala
<sridhar.samudr...@intel.com> wrote:
> +
> +u32 bpf_direct_xsk(const struct bpf_prog *prog, struct xdp_buff *xdp)
> +{
> + struct xdp_sock *xsk;
> +
> + xsk = xdp_get_xsk_from_qid(xdp->rxq->dev, xdp->rxq->queue_index);
> + if (xsk) {
> + struct bpf_redirect_info *ri =
> this_cpu_ptr(&bpf_redirect_info);
> +
> + ri->xsk = xsk;
> + return XDP_REDIRECT;
> + }
> +
> + return XDP_PASS;
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(bpf_direct_xsk);
So you're saying there is a:
"""
xdpsock rxdrop 1 core (both app and queue's irq pinned to the same core)
default : taskset -c 1 ./xdpsock -i enp66s0f0 -r -q 1
direct-xsk :taskset -c 1 ./xdpsock -i enp66s0f0 -r -q 1
6.1x improvement in drop rate
"""
6.1x gain running above C code vs exactly equivalent BPF code?
How is that possible?
