From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Keller, Jacob E Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 20:52:07 +0000 Subject: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH] fm10k: Update ITR scaling mechanism based on PCIe link speed In-Reply-To: <55419187.9040900@redhat.com> References: <1430352634-25084-1-git-send-email-jacob.e.keller@intel.com> <55419187.9040900@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1430427126.25212.6.camel@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org List-ID: On Wed, 2015-04-29 at 19:20 -0700, Alexander Duyck wrote: > > On 04/29/2015 05:10 PM, Jacob Keller wrote: > > Red Rock Canyon's interrupt throttle timers are based on the PCIe link > > speed. Because of this, the value being programmed into the ITR > > registers must be scaled. > > > > For the PF, this is as simple as reading the PCIe link speed and storing > > the result. However, in the case of SR-IOV, the VF's interrupt throttle > > timers are based on the link speed of the PF. However, the VF is unable > > to get the link speed information from its configuration space, so the > > PF must inform it of what scale to use. > > > > Rather than pass this scale via mailbox message, take advantage of > > unused bits in the TDLEN register to pass the scale. It is the > > responsibility of the PF to program this for the VF while setting up the > > VF queues and the responsibility of the VF to get the information > > accordingly. This is preferable because it allows the VF to set up the > > interrupts properly during initialization and matches how the MAC > > address is passed in the TDBAL/TDBAH registers. > > > > These changes also resolve an issue with the existing ITR scale being > > too restrictive. It would throttle down to 1300ints/s at 1538 byte > > frames. This patch modifies the algorithm to allow for a higher range of > > interrupts per second, from roughly 25000int/s up to 100000int/s > > depending on our detection of the workload. > > > > This patch fixes a single receiving TCP_STREAM in netperf: > > - Before: 450 Mbps > > - After: 20,000 Mbps > > > > Signed-off-by: Jacob Keller > > Discovered-by: Matthew Vick > > Should probably be Reported-by, since I don't think Discovered-by is a > standard convention. > > Also I don't think I see any of the changes I suggested. It seems like > this could still divide the interrupt throttle rate all the way down to 0. I'm going to defer this for a bit then, since it depends on other changes I wasn't aware of.. Matthew? Regards, Jake