From: Michal Kubiak <michal.kubiak@intel.com>
To: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
Cc: <intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>,
<maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
<przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>, <horms@kernel.org>,
<anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>,
Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net v2] ice: add a separate Rx handler for flow director commands
Date: Thu, 15 May 2025 11:46:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aCW4DDk7kUsAqCJr@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c8daed51-5935-4070-8d8b-8994d348f746@intel.com>
On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 01:50:22PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote:
>
>
> On 5/14/2025 5:37 AM, Michal Kubiak wrote:
> > The "ice" driver implementation uses the control VSI to handle
> > the flow director configuration for PFs and VFs.
> >
> > Unfortunately, although a separate VSI type was created to handle flow
> > director queues, the Rx queue handler was shared between the flow
> > director and a standard NAPI Rx handler.
> >
> > Such a design approach was not very flexible. First, it mixed hotpath
> > and slowpath code, blocking their further optimization. It also created
> > a huge overkill for the flow director command processing, which is
> > descriptor-based only, so there is no need to allocate Rx data buffers.
> >
> > For the above reasons, implement a separate Rx handler for the control
> > VSI. Also, remove from the NAPI handler the code dedicated to
> > configuring the flow director rules on VFs.
> > Do not allocate Rx data buffers to the flow director queues because
> > their processing is descriptor-based only.
> > Finally, allow Rx data queues to be allocated only for VSIs that have
> > netdev assigned to them.
> >
> > This handler splitting approach is the first step in converting the
> > driver to use the Page Pool (which can only be used for data queues).
> >
> > Test hints:
> > 1. Create a VF for any PF managed by the ice driver.
> > 2. In a loop, add and delete flow director rules for the VF, e.g.:
> >
> > for i in {1..128}; do
> > q=$(( i % 16 ))
> > ethtool -N ens802f0v0 flow-type tcp4 dst-port "$i" action "$q"
> > done
> >
> > for i in {0..127}; do
> > ethtool -N ens802f0v0 delete "$i"
> > done
> >
> > Suggested-by: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>
> > Suggested-by: Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@intel.com>
> > Acked-by: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Michal Kubiak <michal.kubiak@intel.com>
> > ---
>
> I assume you meant for this to be still targeted at iwl-next and the
> iwl-net was a typo?
>
> I'll queue on the next dev-queue.
>
> Thanks,
> Jake
You are right. Of course, it was a typo. My apologies for that!
Thank you for your vigilance and double-checking!
Thanks,
Michal
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Michal Kubiak <michal.kubiak@intel.com>
To: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
Cc: <intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>,
<maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
<przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>, <horms@kernel.org>,
<anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>,
Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH iwl-net v2] ice: add a separate Rx handler for flow director commands
Date: Thu, 15 May 2025 11:46:52 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aCW4DDk7kUsAqCJr@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c8daed51-5935-4070-8d8b-8994d348f746@intel.com>
On Wed, May 14, 2025 at 01:50:22PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote:
>
>
> On 5/14/2025 5:37 AM, Michal Kubiak wrote:
> > The "ice" driver implementation uses the control VSI to handle
> > the flow director configuration for PFs and VFs.
> >
> > Unfortunately, although a separate VSI type was created to handle flow
> > director queues, the Rx queue handler was shared between the flow
> > director and a standard NAPI Rx handler.
> >
> > Such a design approach was not very flexible. First, it mixed hotpath
> > and slowpath code, blocking their further optimization. It also created
> > a huge overkill for the flow director command processing, which is
> > descriptor-based only, so there is no need to allocate Rx data buffers.
> >
> > For the above reasons, implement a separate Rx handler for the control
> > VSI. Also, remove from the NAPI handler the code dedicated to
> > configuring the flow director rules on VFs.
> > Do not allocate Rx data buffers to the flow director queues because
> > their processing is descriptor-based only.
> > Finally, allow Rx data queues to be allocated only for VSIs that have
> > netdev assigned to them.
> >
> > This handler splitting approach is the first step in converting the
> > driver to use the Page Pool (which can only be used for data queues).
> >
> > Test hints:
> > 1. Create a VF for any PF managed by the ice driver.
> > 2. In a loop, add and delete flow director rules for the VF, e.g.:
> >
> > for i in {1..128}; do
> > q=$(( i % 16 ))
> > ethtool -N ens802f0v0 flow-type tcp4 dst-port "$i" action "$q"
> > done
> >
> > for i in {0..127}; do
> > ethtool -N ens802f0v0 delete "$i"
> > done
> >
> > Suggested-by: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>
> > Suggested-by: Michal Swiatkowski <michal.swiatkowski@intel.com>
> > Acked-by: Maciej Fijalkowski <maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Jacob Keller <jacob.e.keller@intel.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Przemek Kitszel <przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Michal Kubiak <michal.kubiak@intel.com>
> > ---
>
> I assume you meant for this to be still targeted at iwl-next and the
> iwl-net was a typo?
>
> I'll queue on the next dev-queue.
>
> Thanks,
> Jake
You are right. Of course, it was a typo. My apologies for that!
Thank you for your vigilance and double-checking!
Thanks,
Michal
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-05-15 9:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-05-14 12:37 [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH iwl-net v2] ice: add a separate Rx handler for flow director commands Michal Kubiak
2025-05-14 12:37 ` Michal Kubiak
2025-05-14 20:50 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Jacob Keller
2025-05-14 20:50 ` Jacob Keller
2025-05-15 9:46 ` Michal Kubiak [this message]
2025-05-15 9:46 ` Michal Kubiak
2025-06-05 8:18 ` [Intel-wired-lan] " Romanowski, Rafal
2025-06-05 8:18 ` Romanowski, Rafal
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=aCW4DDk7kUsAqCJr@localhost.localdomain \
--to=michal.kubiak@intel.com \
--cc=anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org \
--cc=jacob.e.keller@intel.com \
--cc=maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com \
--cc=michal.swiatkowski@intel.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=przemyslaw.kitszel@intel.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.