From: Matteo Croce <mcroce@linux.microsoft.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, peppe.cavallaro@st.com,
alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com, kuba@kernel.org,
palmer@dabbelt.com, paul.walmsley@sifive.com,
drew@beagleboard.org, kernel@esmil.dk
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] stmmac: align RX buffers
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 01:21:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210615012107.577ead86@linux.microsoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210614.125111.1519954686951337716.davem@davemloft.net>
On Mon, 14 Jun 2021 12:51:11 -0700 (PDT)
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
>
> But thois means the ethernet header will be misaliugned and this will
> kill performance on some cpus as misaligned accessed are resolved
> wioth a trap handler.
>
> Even on cpus that don't trap, the access will be slower.
>
> Thanks.
Isn't the IP header which should be aligned to avoid expensive traps?
From include/linux/skbuff.h:
* Since an ethernet header is 14 bytes network drivers often end up with
* the IP header at an unaligned offset. The IP header can be aligned by
* shifting the start of the packet by 2 bytes. Drivers should do this
* with:
*
* skb_reserve(skb, NET_IP_ALIGN);
But the problem here really is not the header alignment, the problem is
that the rx buffer is copied into an skb, and the two buffers have
different alignments.
If I add this print, I get this for every packet:
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
@@ -5460,6 +5460,8 @@ static int stmmac_rx(struct stmmac_priv *priv, int limit, u32 queue)
+ printk("skb->data alignment: %lu\n", (uintptr_t)skb->data & 7);
+ printk("xdp.data alignment: %lu\n" , (uintptr_t)xdp.data & 7);
skb_copy_to_linear_data(skb, xdp.data, buf1_len);
[ 1060.967768] skb->data alignment: 2
[ 1060.971174] xdp.data alignment: 0
[ 1061.967589] skb->data alignment: 2
[ 1061.970994] xdp.data alignment: 0
And many architectures do an optimized memcpy when the low order bits of the
two pointers match, to name a few:
arch/alpha/lib/memcpy.c:
/* If both source and dest are word aligned copy words */
if (!((unsigned int)dest_w & 3) && !((unsigned int)src_w & 3)) {
arch/xtensa/lib/memcopy.S:
/*
* Destination and source are word-aligned, use word copy.
*/
# copy 16 bytes per iteration for word-aligned dst and word-aligned src
arch/openrisc/lib/memcpy.c:
/* If both source and dest are word aligned copy words */
if (!((unsigned int)dest_w & 3) && !((unsigned int)src_w & 3)) {
And so on. With my patch I (mis)align the two buffer at an offset 2
(NET_IP_ALIGN) so the data can be copied faster:
[ 16.648485] skb->data alignment: 2
[ 16.651894] xdp.data alignment: 2
[ 16.714260] skb->data alignment: 2
[ 16.717688] xdp.data alignment: 2
Does this make sense?
Regards,
--
per aspera ad upstream
_______________________________________________
linux-riscv mailing list
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-riscv
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Matteo Croce <mcroce@linux.microsoft.com>
To: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org, peppe.cavallaro@st.com,
alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com, kuba@kernel.org,
palmer@dabbelt.com, paul.walmsley@sifive.com,
drew@beagleboard.org, kernel@esmil.dk
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] stmmac: align RX buffers
Date: Tue, 15 Jun 2021 01:21:07 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210615012107.577ead86@linux.microsoft.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210614.125111.1519954686951337716.davem@davemloft.net>
On Mon, 14 Jun 2021 12:51:11 -0700 (PDT)
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
>
> But thois means the ethernet header will be misaliugned and this will
> kill performance on some cpus as misaligned accessed are resolved
> wioth a trap handler.
>
> Even on cpus that don't trap, the access will be slower.
>
> Thanks.
Isn't the IP header which should be aligned to avoid expensive traps?
From include/linux/skbuff.h:
* Since an ethernet header is 14 bytes network drivers often end up with
* the IP header at an unaligned offset. The IP header can be aligned by
* shifting the start of the packet by 2 bytes. Drivers should do this
* with:
*
* skb_reserve(skb, NET_IP_ALIGN);
But the problem here really is not the header alignment, the problem is
that the rx buffer is copied into an skb, and the two buffers have
different alignments.
If I add this print, I get this for every packet:
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/stmicro/stmmac/stmmac_main.c
@@ -5460,6 +5460,8 @@ static int stmmac_rx(struct stmmac_priv *priv, int limit, u32 queue)
+ printk("skb->data alignment: %lu\n", (uintptr_t)skb->data & 7);
+ printk("xdp.data alignment: %lu\n" , (uintptr_t)xdp.data & 7);
skb_copy_to_linear_data(skb, xdp.data, buf1_len);
[ 1060.967768] skb->data alignment: 2
[ 1060.971174] xdp.data alignment: 0
[ 1061.967589] skb->data alignment: 2
[ 1061.970994] xdp.data alignment: 0
And many architectures do an optimized memcpy when the low order bits of the
two pointers match, to name a few:
arch/alpha/lib/memcpy.c:
/* If both source and dest are word aligned copy words */
if (!((unsigned int)dest_w & 3) && !((unsigned int)src_w & 3)) {
arch/xtensa/lib/memcopy.S:
/*
* Destination and source are word-aligned, use word copy.
*/
# copy 16 bytes per iteration for word-aligned dst and word-aligned src
arch/openrisc/lib/memcpy.c:
/* If both source and dest are word aligned copy words */
if (!((unsigned int)dest_w & 3) && !((unsigned int)src_w & 3)) {
And so on. With my patch I (mis)align the two buffer at an offset 2
(NET_IP_ALIGN) so the data can be copied faster:
[ 16.648485] skb->data alignment: 2
[ 16.651894] xdp.data alignment: 2
[ 16.714260] skb->data alignment: 2
[ 16.717688] xdp.data alignment: 2
Does this make sense?
Regards,
--
per aspera ad upstream
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-06-14 23:21 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 74+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-06-14 2:25 [PATCH net-next] stmmac: align RX buffers Matteo Croce
2021-06-14 2:25 ` Matteo Croce
2021-06-14 19:51 ` David Miller
2021-06-14 19:51 ` David Miller
2021-06-14 23:21 ` Matteo Croce [this message]
2021-06-14 23:21 ` Matteo Croce
2021-06-15 17:28 ` David Miller
2021-06-15 17:28 ` David Miller
2021-06-15 17:30 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
2021-06-15 17:30 ` patchwork-bot+netdevbpf
2021-08-10 19:07 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-10 19:07 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-11 10:28 ` Thierry Reding
2021-08-11 10:28 ` Thierry Reding
2021-08-11 12:53 ` Eric Dumazet
2021-08-11 12:53 ` Eric Dumazet
2021-08-11 14:16 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-11 14:16 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-12 8:48 ` Eric Dumazet
2021-08-12 8:48 ` Eric Dumazet
2021-08-12 10:18 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-12 10:18 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-12 11:05 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-12 11:05 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-12 11:18 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-12 11:18 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-19 16:29 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-19 16:29 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-20 10:37 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-20 10:37 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-20 16:26 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-20 16:26 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-20 16:38 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-20 16:38 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-20 17:09 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-20 17:09 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-20 17:14 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-20 17:14 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-20 17:24 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-20 17:24 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-20 17:35 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-20 17:35 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-20 17:51 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-20 17:51 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-20 17:56 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-20 17:56 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-20 18:05 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-20 18:05 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-20 18:14 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-20 18:14 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-20 18:09 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-20 18:09 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-20 18:14 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-20 18:14 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-20 18:41 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-20 18:41 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-16 15:12 ` Jakub Kicinski
2021-08-16 15:12 ` Jakub Kicinski
2021-08-17 0:01 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-17 0:01 ` Matteo Croce
2021-08-19 15:26 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-19 15:26 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-11 10:41 ` Thierry Reding
2021-08-11 10:41 ` Thierry Reding
2021-08-11 10:56 ` Joakim Zhang
2021-08-11 10:56 ` Joakim Zhang
2021-08-11 13:23 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-11 13:23 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-12 14:29 ` Thierry Reding
2021-08-12 14:29 ` Thierry Reding
2021-08-12 15:26 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-12 15:26 ` Marc Zyngier
2021-08-13 14:44 ` Thierry Reding
2021-08-13 14:44 ` Thierry Reding
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=20210615012107.577ead86@linux.microsoft.com \
--to=mcroce@linux.microsoft.com \
--cc=alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=drew@beagleboard.org \
--cc=kernel@esmil.dk \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=palmer@dabbelt.com \
--cc=paul.walmsley@sifive.com \
--cc=peppe.cavallaro@st.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.