All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: brouer@redhat.com, Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@kernel.org>,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org,
	dust.li@linux.alibaba.com, Marek Majtyka <alardam@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH netdev] virtio-net: support XDP_TX when not more queues
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 12:00:05 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210211120005.04af2c0f@carbon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210210163945-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>

On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 16:40:41 -0500
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 04:08:57PM +0800, Xuan Zhuo wrote:
> > The number of queues implemented by many virtio backends is limited,
> > especially some machines have a large number of CPUs. In this case, it
> > is often impossible to allocate a separate queue for XDP_TX.
> > 
> > This patch allows XDP_TX to run by reuse the existing SQ with
> > __netif_tx_lock() hold when there are not enough queues.

I'm a little puzzled about the choice of using the netdevice TXQ
lock __netif_tx_lock() / __netif_tx_unlock().
Can you explain more about this choice?

> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Dust Li <dust.li@linux.alibaba.com>  
> 
> I'd like to get some advice on whether this is ok from some
> XDP experts - previously my understanding was that it is
> preferable to disable XDP for such devices than
> use locks on XDP fast path.

I think it is acceptable, because the ndo_xdp_xmit / virtnet_xdp_xmit
takes a bulk of packets (currently 16).

Some drivers already does this.

It would have been nice if we could set a feature flag, that allow
users to see that this driver uses locking in the XDP transmit
(ndo_xdp_xmit) function call... but it seems like a pipe dream :-P

Code related to the locking

> > diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > index ba8e637..7a3b2a7 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
[...]
> > @@ -481,14 +484,34 @@ static int __virtnet_xdp_xmit_one(struct virtnet_info *vi,
> >  	return 0;
> >  }
> >  
> > -static struct send_queue *virtnet_xdp_sq(struct virtnet_info *vi)
> > +static struct send_queue *virtnet_get_xdp_sq(struct virtnet_info *vi)
> >  {
> >  	unsigned int qp;
> > +	struct netdev_queue *txq;
> > +
> > +	if (vi->curr_queue_pairs > nr_cpu_ids) {
> > +		qp = vi->curr_queue_pairs - vi->xdp_queue_pairs + smp_processor_id();
> > +	} else {
> > +		qp = smp_processor_id() % vi->curr_queue_pairs;
> > +		txq = netdev_get_tx_queue(vi->dev, qp);
> > +		__netif_tx_lock(txq, raw_smp_processor_id());
> > +	}
> >  
> > -	qp = vi->curr_queue_pairs - vi->xdp_queue_pairs + smp_processor_id();
> >  	return &vi->sq[qp];
> >  }
> >  
> > +static void virtnet_put_xdp_sq(struct virtnet_info *vi)
> > +{
> > +	unsigned int qp;
> > +	struct netdev_queue *txq;
> > +
> > +	if (vi->curr_queue_pairs <= nr_cpu_ids) {
> > +		qp = smp_processor_id() % vi->curr_queue_pairs;
> > +		txq = netdev_get_tx_queue(vi->dev, qp);
> > +		__netif_tx_unlock(txq);
> > +	}
> > +}
> > +
> >  static int virtnet_xdp_xmit(struct net_device *dev,
> >  			    int n, struct xdp_frame **frames, u32 flags)
> >  {
> > @@ -512,7 +535,7 @@ static int virtnet_xdp_xmit(struct net_device *dev,
> >  	if (!xdp_prog)
> >  		return -ENXIO;
> >  
> > -	sq = virtnet_xdp_sq(vi);
> > +	sq = virtnet_get_xdp_sq(vi);
> >  
> >  	if (unlikely(flags & ~XDP_XMIT_FLAGS_MASK)) {
> >  		ret = -EINVAL;
> > @@ -560,12 +583,13 @@ static int virtnet_xdp_xmit(struct net_device *dev,
> >  	sq->stats.kicks += kicks;
> >  	u64_stats_update_end(&sq->stats.syncp);
> >  
> > +	virtnet_put_xdp_sq(vi);
> >  	return ret;
> >  }
> >  



-- 
Best regards,
  Jesper Dangaard Brouer
  MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
  LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer


WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@redhat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Cc: Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com>,
	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@kernel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>,
	virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org,
	Marek Majtyka <alardam@gmail.com>,
	dust.li@linux.alibaba.com, brouer@redhat.com,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH netdev] virtio-net: support XDP_TX when not more queues
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2021 12:00:05 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210211120005.04af2c0f@carbon> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210210163945-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>

On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 16:40:41 -0500
"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 04:08:57PM +0800, Xuan Zhuo wrote:
> > The number of queues implemented by many virtio backends is limited,
> > especially some machines have a large number of CPUs. In this case, it
> > is often impossible to allocate a separate queue for XDP_TX.
> > 
> > This patch allows XDP_TX to run by reuse the existing SQ with
> > __netif_tx_lock() hold when there are not enough queues.

I'm a little puzzled about the choice of using the netdevice TXQ
lock __netif_tx_lock() / __netif_tx_unlock().
Can you explain more about this choice?

> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Xuan Zhuo <xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Dust Li <dust.li@linux.alibaba.com>  
> 
> I'd like to get some advice on whether this is ok from some
> XDP experts - previously my understanding was that it is
> preferable to disable XDP for such devices than
> use locks on XDP fast path.

I think it is acceptable, because the ndo_xdp_xmit / virtnet_xdp_xmit
takes a bulk of packets (currently 16).

Some drivers already does this.

It would have been nice if we could set a feature flag, that allow
users to see that this driver uses locking in the XDP transmit
(ndo_xdp_xmit) function call... but it seems like a pipe dream :-P

Code related to the locking

> > diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > index ba8e637..7a3b2a7 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c
[...]
> > @@ -481,14 +484,34 @@ static int __virtnet_xdp_xmit_one(struct virtnet_info *vi,
> >  	return 0;
> >  }
> >  
> > -static struct send_queue *virtnet_xdp_sq(struct virtnet_info *vi)
> > +static struct send_queue *virtnet_get_xdp_sq(struct virtnet_info *vi)
> >  {
> >  	unsigned int qp;
> > +	struct netdev_queue *txq;
> > +
> > +	if (vi->curr_queue_pairs > nr_cpu_ids) {
> > +		qp = vi->curr_queue_pairs - vi->xdp_queue_pairs + smp_processor_id();
> > +	} else {
> > +		qp = smp_processor_id() % vi->curr_queue_pairs;
> > +		txq = netdev_get_tx_queue(vi->dev, qp);
> > +		__netif_tx_lock(txq, raw_smp_processor_id());
> > +	}
> >  
> > -	qp = vi->curr_queue_pairs - vi->xdp_queue_pairs + smp_processor_id();
> >  	return &vi->sq[qp];
> >  }
> >  
> > +static void virtnet_put_xdp_sq(struct virtnet_info *vi)
> > +{
> > +	unsigned int qp;
> > +	struct netdev_queue *txq;
> > +
> > +	if (vi->curr_queue_pairs <= nr_cpu_ids) {
> > +		qp = smp_processor_id() % vi->curr_queue_pairs;
> > +		txq = netdev_get_tx_queue(vi->dev, qp);
> > +		__netif_tx_unlock(txq);
> > +	}
> > +}
> > +
> >  static int virtnet_xdp_xmit(struct net_device *dev,
> >  			    int n, struct xdp_frame **frames, u32 flags)
> >  {
> > @@ -512,7 +535,7 @@ static int virtnet_xdp_xmit(struct net_device *dev,
> >  	if (!xdp_prog)
> >  		return -ENXIO;
> >  
> > -	sq = virtnet_xdp_sq(vi);
> > +	sq = virtnet_get_xdp_sq(vi);
> >  
> >  	if (unlikely(flags & ~XDP_XMIT_FLAGS_MASK)) {
> >  		ret = -EINVAL;
> > @@ -560,12 +583,13 @@ static int virtnet_xdp_xmit(struct net_device *dev,
> >  	sq->stats.kicks += kicks;
> >  	u64_stats_update_end(&sq->stats.syncp);
> >  
> > +	virtnet_put_xdp_sq(vi);
> >  	return ret;
> >  }
> >  



-- 
Best regards,
  Jesper Dangaard Brouer
  MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
  LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer

_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization

  reply	other threads:[~2021-02-11 11:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-01-13  8:08 [PATCH netdev] virtio-net: support XDP_TX when not more queues Xuan Zhuo
2021-01-16  1:47 ` Jakub Kicinski
2021-02-10 21:40 ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-02-10 21:40   ` Michael S. Tsirkin
2021-02-11 11:00   ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer [this message]
2021-02-11 11:00     ` Jesper Dangaard Brouer
2021-02-18  2:18   ` Jason Wang
2021-02-18  2:18     ` Jason Wang

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=20210211120005.04af2c0f@carbon \
    --to=brouer@redhat.com \
    --cc=alardam@gmail.com \
    --cc=ast@kernel.org \
    --cc=bpf@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=daniel@iogearbox.net \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dust.li@linux.alibaba.com \
    --cc=hawk@kernel.org \
    --cc=jasowang@redhat.com \
    --cc=john.fastabend@gmail.com \
    --cc=kuba@kernel.org \
    --cc=mst@redhat.com \
    --cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=virtualization@lists.linux-foundation.org \
    --cc=xuanzhuo@linux.alibaba.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.