* [PATCH 8/43]: New RX History Step 2 - Initialisation and cleanup
@ 2007-04-05 15:33 Gerrit Renker
2007-04-06 3:32 ` Ian McDonald
` (3 more replies)
0 siblings, 4 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Gerrit Renker @ 2007-04-05 15:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dccp
[CCID 3]: New RX History Step 2 - Initialisation and cleanup
This adds initialisation and cleanup wrappers for the RX history.
It further makes the allocation of dccp_rx_hist entries local to
packet_history.c, as a service exported by the tfrc module.
Signed-off-by: Gerrit Renker <gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk>
---
net/dccp/ccids/ccid3.c | 26 ++++--------------
net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.c | 51 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.h | 5 +--
net/dccp/ccids/lib/tfrc_module.c | 7 ++++
4 files changed, 60 insertions(+), 29 deletions(-)
--- a/net/dccp/ccids/lib/tfrc_module.c
+++ b/net/dccp/ccids/lib/tfrc_module.c
@@ -5,15 +5,20 @@
#include <linux/moduleparam.h>
#include "tfrc.h"
+/* Initialisation / Clean-up routines */
+extern int packet_history_init(void);
+extern void packet_history_cleanup(void);
+
static int __init tfrc_module_init(void)
{
- int rc = 0;
+ int rc = packet_history_init();
return rc;
}
static void __exit tfrc_module_exit(void)
{
+ packet_history_cleanup();
}
module_init(tfrc_module_init);
--- a/net/dccp/ccids/ccid3.c
+++ b/net/dccp/ccids/ccid3.c
@@ -46,7 +46,6 @@ static int ccid3_debug;
#endif
static struct dccp_tx_hist *ccid3_tx_hist;
-static struct dccp_rx_hist *ccid3_rx_hist;
static struct dccp_li_hist *ccid3_li_hist;
/*
@@ -1116,13 +1115,14 @@ static int ccid3_hc_rx_init(struct ccid
ccid3_pr_debug("entry\n");
- hcrx->ccid3hcrx_state = TFRC_RSTATE_NO_DATA;
- INIT_LIST_HEAD(&hcrx->ccid3hcrx_hist);
+ if (tfrc_rx_hist_init(&hcrx->ccid3hcrx_hist))
+ return 1;
INIT_LIST_HEAD(&hcrx->ccid3hcrx_li_hist);
do_gettimeofday(&hcrx->ccid3hcrx_tstamp_last_ack);
hcrx->ccid3hcrx_tstamp_last_feedback = hcrx->ccid3hcrx_tstamp_last_ack;
- hcrx->ccid3hcrx_s = 0;
- hcrx->ccid3hcrx_rtt = 0;
+ hcrx->ccid3hcrx_state = TFRC_RSTATE_NO_DATA;
+ hcrx->ccid3hcrx_s = 0;
+ hcrx->ccid3hcrx_rtt = 0;
return 0;
}
@@ -1134,8 +1134,7 @@ static void ccid3_hc_rx_exit(struct sock
ccid3_hc_rx_set_state(sk, TFRC_RSTATE_TERM);
- /* Empty packet history */
- dccp_rx_hist_purge(ccid3_rx_hist, &hcrx->ccid3hcrx_hist);
+ tfrc_rx_hist_cleanup(&hcrx->ccid3hcrx_hist);
/* Empty loss interval history */
dccp_li_hist_purge(ccid3_li_hist, &hcrx->ccid3hcrx_li_hist);
@@ -1219,13 +1218,9 @@ static __init int ccid3_module_init(void
{
int rc = -ENOBUFS;
- ccid3_rx_hist = dccp_rx_hist_new("ccid3");
- if (ccid3_rx_hist = NULL)
- goto out;
-
ccid3_tx_hist = dccp_tx_hist_new("ccid3");
if (ccid3_tx_hist = NULL)
- goto out_free_rx;
+ goto out;
ccid3_li_hist = dccp_li_hist_new("ccid3");
if (ccid3_li_hist = NULL)
@@ -1243,9 +1238,6 @@ out_free_loss_interval_history:
out_free_tx:
dccp_tx_hist_delete(ccid3_tx_hist);
ccid3_tx_hist = NULL;
-out_free_rx:
- dccp_rx_hist_delete(ccid3_rx_hist);
- ccid3_rx_hist = NULL;
goto out;
}
module_init(ccid3_module_init);
@@ -1258,10 +1250,6 @@ static __exit void ccid3_module_exit(voi
dccp_tx_hist_delete(ccid3_tx_hist);
ccid3_tx_hist = NULL;
}
- if (ccid3_rx_hist != NULL) {
- dccp_rx_hist_delete(ccid3_rx_hist);
- ccid3_rx_hist = NULL;
- }
if (ccid3_li_hist != NULL) {
dccp_li_hist_delete(ccid3_li_hist);
ccid3_li_hist = NULL;
--- a/net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.c
+++ b/net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.c
@@ -164,7 +164,9 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dccp_tx_hist_purge);
/*
* Receiver History Routines
*/
-struct dccp_rx_hist *dccp_rx_hist_new(const char *name)
+static struct dccp_rx_hist *tfrcxh;
+
+static struct dccp_rx_hist *dccp_rx_hist_new(const char *name)
{
struct dccp_rx_hist *hist = kmalloc(sizeof(*hist), GFP_ATOMIC);
static const char dccp_rx_hist_mask[] = "rx_hist_%s";
@@ -195,9 +197,7 @@ out_free_hist:
goto out;
}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dccp_rx_hist_new);
-
-void dccp_rx_hist_delete(struct dccp_rx_hist *hist)
+static void dccp_rx_hist_delete(struct dccp_rx_hist *hist)
{
const char* name = kmem_cache_name(hist->dccprxh_slab);
@@ -206,8 +206,6 @@ void dccp_rx_hist_delete(struct dccp_rx_
kfree(hist);
}
-EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dccp_rx_hist_delete);
-
int dccp_rx_hist_find_entry(const struct list_head *list, const u64 seq,
u8 *ccval)
{
@@ -324,3 +322,44 @@ void dccp_rx_hist_purge(struct dccp_rx_h
}
EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dccp_rx_hist_purge);
+
+int tfrc_rx_hist_init(struct tfrc_rx_hist *h)
+{
+ int i;
+
+ for (i = 0; i <= NDUPACK; i++) {
+ h->ring[i] = kmem_cache_alloc(tfrcxh->dccprxh_slab, GFP_ATOMIC);
+ if (h->ring[i] = NULL)
+ return 1;
+ }
+ spin_lock_init(&h->lock);
+ h->loss_count = 0;
+ h->loss_start = 0;
+ return 0;
+}
+
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(tfrc_rx_hist_init);
+
+void tfrc_rx_hist_cleanup(struct tfrc_rx_hist *h)
+{
+ int i;
+
+ for (i=0; i <= NDUPACK; i++)
+ if (h->ring[i] != NULL)
+ kmem_cache_free(tfrcxh->dccprxh_slab, h->ring[i]);
+}
+
+EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(tfrc_rx_hist_cleanup);
+
+/* Module initialisation and cleanup routines */
+int __init packet_history_init(void)
+{
+ tfrcxh = dccp_rx_hist_new("tfrc");
+ return tfrcxh = NULL ? -ENOBUFS : 0;
+}
+
+void __exit packet_history_cleanup(void)
+{
+ if (tfrcxh != NULL)
+ dccp_rx_hist_delete(tfrcxh);
+}
--- a/net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.h
+++ b/net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.h
@@ -106,9 +106,6 @@ struct dccp_rx_hist {
struct kmem_cache *dccprxh_slab;
};
-extern struct dccp_rx_hist *dccp_rx_hist_new(const char *name);
-extern void dccp_rx_hist_delete(struct dccp_rx_hist *hist);
-
/**
* tfrc_rx_hist - RX history structure for TFRC-based protocols
*
@@ -205,6 +202,8 @@ static inline void tfrc_rx_hist_swap(str
*b = tmp;
}
+extern int tfrc_rx_hist_init(struct tfrc_rx_hist *);
+extern void tfrc_rx_hist_cleanup(struct tfrc_rx_hist *);
/* Older history management functions */
static inline struct dccp_rx_hist_entry *
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 8/43]: New RX History Step 2 - Initialisation and cleanup
2007-04-05 15:33 [PATCH 8/43]: New RX History Step 2 - Initialisation and cleanup Gerrit Renker
@ 2007-04-06 3:32 ` Ian McDonald
2007-04-06 8:48 ` Gerrit Renker
` (2 subsequent siblings)
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Ian McDonald @ 2007-04-06 3:32 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dccp
On 4/6/07, Gerrit Renker <gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk> wrote:
> [CCID 3]: New RX History Step 2 - Initialisation and cleanup
> +int tfrc_rx_hist_init(struct tfrc_rx_hist *h)
> +{
> + int i;
> +
> + for (i = 0; i <= NDUPACK; i++) {
> + h->ring[i] = kmem_cache_alloc(tfrcxh->dccprxh_slab, GFP_ATOMIC);
> + if (h->ring[i] = NULL)
> + return 1;
> + }
> + spin_lock_init(&h->lock);
> + h->loss_count = 0;
> + h->loss_start = 0;
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(tfrc_rx_hist_init);
Given that you are allocating a fixed size amount of memory which is
known at compile time I think that allocating one block per entry is
the wrong approach and you lose half the value of having it in a ring
buffer as you still have to dereference. This uses more memory to
store each of the pointers and there is a good chance that they may
not be contiguous in memory and thus your cache memory gets more
dirty.
When I started working on the code to remove linked list I was looking
at creating an array of 8 all in one operation when going to be first
used. I also share Eddies comment about the size of this.
NB I'm not saying that this shouldn't go in. I'm just saying this is
not the most efficient.
Ian
--
Web: http://wand.net.nz/~iam4/
Blog: http://iansblog.jandi.co.nz
WAND Network Research Group
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 8/43]: New RX History Step 2 - Initialisation and cleanup
2007-04-05 15:33 [PATCH 8/43]: New RX History Step 2 - Initialisation and cleanup Gerrit Renker
2007-04-06 3:32 ` Ian McDonald
@ 2007-04-06 8:48 ` Gerrit Renker
2007-04-07 4:25 ` Ian McDonald
2007-04-09 12:13 ` Gerrit Renker
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Gerrit Renker @ 2007-04-06 8:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dccp
Quoting Ian McDonald:
| On 4/6/07, Gerrit Renker <gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk> wrote:
| > [CCID 3]: New RX History Step 2 - Initialisation and cleanup
| > +int tfrc_rx_hist_init(struct tfrc_rx_hist *h)
| > +{
| > + int i;
| > +
| > + for (i = 0; i <= NDUPACK; i++) {
| > + h->ring[i] = kmem_cache_alloc(tfrcxh->dccprxh_slab, GFP_ATOMIC);
| > + if (h->ring[i] = NULL)
| > + return 1;
| > + }
| > + spin_lock_init(&h->lock);
| > + h->loss_count = 0;
| > + h->loss_start = 0;
| > + return 0;
| > +}
| > +
| > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(tfrc_rx_hist_init);
|
| Given that you are allocating a fixed size amount of memory which is
| known at compile time I think that allocating one block per entry is
| the wrong approach and you lose half the value of having it in a ring
| buffer as you still have to dereference. This uses more memory to
| store each of the pointers and there is a good chance that they may
| not be contiguous in memory and thus your cache memory gets more
| dirty.
These are good points. Are you suggesting to kmalloc the entire array instead?
The main point which convinced me to use a slab cache was that the slab cache is
now global for the entire tfrc_lib module, i.e. when there are e.g. 10 CCID3
connections, they will all allocate from the same slab.
With regard to your second point, I quote from
http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gerrit/dccp/docs/ccid3_packet_reception/loss_detection/loss_detection_algorithm_notes.txt
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. 'ring' is an array of pointers rather than a contiguous area in
memory. The reason is that, when having to swap adjacent entries
to sort the history, it is easier to swap pointers than to copy
(heavy-weight) history-entry data structs.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given that pointer references are needed, is using kmalloc for each of the 4 entries
a better way than using the slab cache?
| I also share Eddies comment about the size of this.
Oops - then it means that you are also confusing RX history with LI database.
The LI database starts at patch #16 (12a) and ends at patch #24. This is the
receiver history structure, used for loss detection and RTT sampling. The LI
database has sufficient = 9 entries.
| NB I'm not saying that this shouldn't go in. I'm just saying this is
| not the most efficient.
If you can suggest any improvements, I'd be most happy to take them on board.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread* Re: [PATCH 8/43]: New RX History Step 2 - Initialisation and cleanup
2007-04-05 15:33 [PATCH 8/43]: New RX History Step 2 - Initialisation and cleanup Gerrit Renker
2007-04-06 3:32 ` Ian McDonald
2007-04-06 8:48 ` Gerrit Renker
@ 2007-04-07 4:25 ` Ian McDonald
2007-04-09 12:13 ` Gerrit Renker
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Ian McDonald @ 2007-04-07 4:25 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dccp
On 4/6/07, Gerrit Renker <gerrit@erg.abdn.ac.uk> wrote:
> Quoting Ian McDonald:
> | Given that you are allocating a fixed size amount of memory which is
> | known at compile time I think that allocating one block per entry is
> | the wrong approach and you lose half the value of having it in a ring
> | buffer as you still have to dereference. This uses more memory to
> | store each of the pointers and there is a good chance that they may
> | not be contiguous in memory and thus your cache memory gets more
> | dirty.
> These are good points. Are you suggesting to kmalloc the entire array instead?
> The main point which convinced me to use a slab cache was that the slab cache is
> now global for the entire tfrc_lib module, i.e. when there are e.g. 10 CCID3
> connections, they will all allocate from the same slab.
Yes I was suggesting allocating all in one block as less work in
theory for one allocation.
>
> With regard to your second point, I quote from
> http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gerrit/dccp/docs/ccid3_packet_reception/loss_detection/loss_detection_algorithm_notes.txt
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 1. 'ring' is an array of pointers rather than a contiguous area in
> memory. The reason is that, when having to swap adjacent entries
> to sort the history, it is easier to swap pointers than to copy
> (heavy-weight) history-entry data structs.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Given that pointer references are needed, is using kmalloc for each of the 4 entries
> a better way than using the slab cache?
>
OK. Didn't read that part. Ignore what I'm saying then!
>
> | I also share Eddies comment about the size of this.
> Oops - then it means that you are also confusing RX history with LI database.
> The LI database starts at patch #16 (12a) and ends at patch #24. This is the
> receiver history structure, used for loss detection and RTT sampling. The LI
> database has sufficient = 9 entries.
My bad. Yes I am confusing them. I haven't yet read through all the
patches. Again I'm not commenting much unless I think I can add
something but you seem to be doing a good job.
--
Web: http://wand.net.nz/~iam4/
Blog: http://iansblog.jandi.co.nz
WAND Network Research Group
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH 8/43]: New RX History Step 2 - Initialisation and cleanup
2007-04-05 15:33 [PATCH 8/43]: New RX History Step 2 - Initialisation and cleanup Gerrit Renker
` (2 preceding siblings ...)
2007-04-07 4:25 ` Ian McDonald
@ 2007-04-09 12:13 ` Gerrit Renker
3 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: Gerrit Renker @ 2007-04-09 12:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dccp
I agree that the number of patches is higher than usual. To make things a bit simpler,
I have created combined patches for all the three past patch-set submissions on
http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gerrit/dccp/patches_working-set/
01_First-Half.diff - combines the first 25 patches from
http://www.mail-archive.com/dccp@vger.kernel.org/msg01439.html
02_Second-Half.diff - combines the 43-1B patches from
http://www.mail-archive.com/dccp@vger.kernel.org/msg01525.html
03_Sync-Flood-Bug-Fix.diff - is the most recent change set from
http://www.mail-archive.com/dccp@vger.kernel.org/msg01591.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2007-04-09 12:13 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-04-05 15:33 [PATCH 8/43]: New RX History Step 2 - Initialisation and cleanup Gerrit Renker
2007-04-06 3:32 ` Ian McDonald
2007-04-06 8:48 ` Gerrit Renker
2007-04-07 4:25 ` Ian McDonald
2007-04-09 12:13 ` Gerrit Renker
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.