From: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
To: anton@samba.org, kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru, davem@redhat.com
Cc: netdev@oss.sgi.com
Subject: net/core/flow.c cpu handling?
Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2003 17:22:55 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20031102062345.A472E2C0CD@lists.samba.org> (raw)
Hi again,
Is there something I'm missing, or wouldn't the code in
net/core/flow.c be much simpler if:
1) flow_cache_cpu_prepare() were done for each possible cpu, not
dynamically as they came up.
2) The cpucontrol lock is held in flow_cache_flush to guarantee that
cpus don't go up and down.
3) The normal cpu_online_map were used instead of flow_cache_cpu_map.
The patch below is untested, but if you can't see anything wrong with
the approach, I'll test it.
Cheers,
Rusty.
--
Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell.
Name: Simplify CPU Handling in net/core/flow.c
Author: Rusty Russell
Status: Booted on 2.6.0-test9-bk6
D: The cpu handling in net/core/flow.c is flawed, because it uses an
D: unsigned long instead of a cpumask_t. This replaces that code
D: with a much simpler version which allocates for every possible CPU,
D: (the same amount of work on most machines) and takes the cpucontrol
D: semaphore when flushing.
--- linux-2.6.0-test9-bk4/net/core/flow.c 2003-10-09 18:03:03.000000000 +1000
+++ working-2.6.0-test9-bk4-hotcpu-with-kthread/net/core/flow.c 2003-11-02 17:10:55.000000000 +1100
@@ -65,23 +65,18 @@
struct flow_flush_info {
atomic_t cpuleft;
- unsigned long cpumap;
struct completion completion;
};
static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct tasklet_struct, flow_flush_tasklets) = { NULL };
#define flow_flush_tasklet(cpu) (&per_cpu(flow_flush_tasklets, cpu))
-static DECLARE_MUTEX(flow_cache_cpu_sem);
-static unsigned long flow_cache_cpu_map;
-static unsigned int flow_cache_cpu_count;
-
static void flow_cache_new_hashrnd(unsigned long arg)
{
int i;
for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++)
- if (test_bit(i, &flow_cache_cpu_map))
+ if (cpu_possible(i))
flow_hash_rnd_recalc(i) = 1;
flow_hash_rnd_timer.expires = jiffies + FLOW_HASH_RND_PERIOD;
@@ -178,7 +173,9 @@
cpu = smp_processor_id();
fle = NULL;
- if (!test_bit(cpu, &flow_cache_cpu_map))
+ /* Packet really early in init? Making flow_cache_init a
+ * pre-smp initcall would solve this. --RR */
+ if (!flow_table(cpu))
goto nocache;
if (flow_hash_rnd_recalc(cpu))
@@ -277,9 +274,6 @@
struct tasklet_struct *tasklet;
cpu = smp_processor_id();
- if (!test_bit(cpu, &info->cpumap))
- return;
-
tasklet = flow_flush_tasklet(cpu);
tasklet->data = (unsigned long)info;
tasklet_schedule(tasklet);
@@ -288,29 +282,23 @@
void flow_cache_flush(void)
{
struct flow_flush_info info;
- static DECLARE_MUTEX(flow_flush_sem);
-
- down(&flow_cache_cpu_sem);
- info.cpumap = flow_cache_cpu_map;
- atomic_set(&info.cpuleft, flow_cache_cpu_count);
- up(&flow_cache_cpu_sem);
+ /* Don't want cpus going down or up during this, also protects
+ * against multiple callers. */
+ down(&cpucontrol);
+ atomic_set(&info.cpuleft, num_online_cpus());
init_completion(&info.completion);
- down(&flow_flush_sem);
-
local_bh_disable();
smp_call_function(flow_cache_flush_per_cpu, &info, 1, 0);
- if (test_bit(smp_processor_id(), &info.cpumap))
- flow_cache_flush_tasklet((unsigned long)&info);
+ flow_cache_flush_tasklet((unsigned long)&info);
local_bh_enable();
wait_for_completion(&info.completion);
-
- up(&flow_flush_sem);
+ up(&cpucontrol);
}
-static int __devinit flow_cache_cpu_prepare(int cpu)
+static void __devinit flow_cache_cpu_prepare(int cpu)
{
struct tasklet_struct *tasklet;
unsigned long order;
@@ -323,9 +311,8 @@
flow_table(cpu) = (struct flow_cache_entry **)
__get_free_pages(GFP_KERNEL, order);
-
if (!flow_table(cpu))
- return NOTIFY_BAD;
+ panic("NET: failed to allocate flow cache order %lu\n", order);
memset(flow_table(cpu), 0, PAGE_SIZE << order);
@@ -334,39 +321,8 @@
tasklet = flow_flush_tasklet(cpu);
tasklet_init(tasklet, flow_cache_flush_tasklet, 0);
-
- return NOTIFY_OK;
-}
-
-static int __devinit flow_cache_cpu_online(int cpu)
-{
- down(&flow_cache_cpu_sem);
- set_bit(cpu, &flow_cache_cpu_map);
- flow_cache_cpu_count++;
- up(&flow_cache_cpu_sem);
-
- return NOTIFY_OK;
-}
-
-static int __devinit flow_cache_cpu_notify(struct notifier_block *self,
- unsigned long action, void *hcpu)
-{
- unsigned long cpu = (unsigned long)cpu;
- switch (action) {
- case CPU_UP_PREPARE:
- return flow_cache_cpu_prepare(cpu);
- break;
- case CPU_ONLINE:
- return flow_cache_cpu_online(cpu);
- break;
- }
- return NOTIFY_OK;
}
-static struct notifier_block __devinitdata flow_cache_cpu_nb = {
- .notifier_call = flow_cache_cpu_notify,
-};
-
static int __init flow_cache_init(void)
{
int i;
@@ -388,15 +344,9 @@
flow_hash_rnd_timer.expires = jiffies + FLOW_HASH_RND_PERIOD;
add_timer(&flow_hash_rnd_timer);
- register_cpu_notifier(&flow_cache_cpu_nb);
- for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++) {
- if (!cpu_online(i))
- continue;
- if (flow_cache_cpu_prepare(i) == NOTIFY_OK &&
- flow_cache_cpu_online(i) == NOTIFY_OK)
- continue;
- panic("NET: failed to initialise flow cache hash table\n");
- }
+ for (i = 0; i < NR_CPUS; i++)
+ if (cpu_possible(i))
+ flow_cache_cpu_prepare(i);
return 0;
}
next reply other threads:[~2003-11-02 6:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-11-02 6:22 Rusty Russell [this message]
2003-11-02 6:50 ` net/core/flow.c cpu handling? David S. Miller
2003-11-03 10:26 ` Rusty Russell
2003-11-03 22:45 ` David S. Miller
2003-11-03 15:11 ` Christoph Hellwig
2003-11-03 22:55 ` David S. Miller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20031102062345.A472E2C0CD@lists.samba.org \
--to=rusty@rustcorp.com.au \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=davem@redhat.com \
--cc=kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru \
--cc=netdev@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.