From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org (smtp4.osuosl.org [140.211.166.137]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5D26FE77198 for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:26:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1819F4049D; Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:26:50 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavis at osuosl.org Received: from smtp4.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp4.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id PxxVs-pekARv; Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:26:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Comment: SPF check N/A for local connections - client-ip=140.211.166.142; helo=lists1.osuosl.org; envelope-from=intel-wired-lan-bounces@osuosl.org; receiver= DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp4.osuosl.org 6A94940489 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=osuosl.org; s=default; t=1736260008; bh=vcbDAo/G+1qjA1QI53mP6il8NGe+B3qtUjge2AuvwSc=; h=Date:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:Subject:List-Id: List-Unsubscribe:List-Archive:List-Post:List-Help:List-Subscribe: From; b=vMDgWHZvjfFMPVjxC5ENROGCGmXmXg23K64s5kd+yNNWpYgWlAYSdcIMmjv6LZRS0 JpXIPYDX90m3joCQg5vNqrdRARHLhn0VTiW0oVhWD3bLa4t14RRoF2jbkN4zBSw51r Qm2jkwWkRN7qKm/16F2CwHCzXj9qoX/F3jLNkSHaXd+uPXeOL9Qtdsdg0+lkuPfDvw A48aVhLykVC0M51CxpVrzNHvizCAv56xNC5wp5J+eH7/uIvv0+i+hkk8RpQ5n/7iZf Rr/UIDUzups44zd1d7Snrchmdf1ppcL+lXs5pW2FW9PCZ+dGTEHna+vDUlYclry4rz 1MJ63kpuBAKKw== Received: from lists1.osuosl.org (lists1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.142]) by smtp4.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A94940489; Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:26:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org (smtp1.osuosl.org [140.211.166.138]) by lists1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E65856B for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:26:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D3DCA80E3F for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:26:46 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavis at osuosl.org Received: from smtp1.osuosl.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp1.osuosl.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavis, port 10024) with ESMTP id apeghIaEj_Ds for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:26:45 +0000 (UTC) Received-SPF: Pass (mailfrom) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=147.75.193.91; helo=nyc.source.kernel.org; envelope-from=hawk@kernel.org; receiver= DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 smtp1.osuosl.org 6C57880E28 DKIM-Filter: OpenDKIM Filter v2.11.0 smtp1.osuosl.org 6C57880E28 Received: from nyc.source.kernel.org (nyc.source.kernel.org [147.75.193.91]) by smtp1.osuosl.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6C57880E28 for ; Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:26:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by nyc.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9C4B1A41587; Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:24:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1940CC4CED6; Tue, 7 Jan 2025 14:26:37 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2025 15:26:35 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird To: Yunsheng Lin , davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com Cc: liuyonglong@huawei.com, fanghaiqing@huawei.com, zhangkun09@huawei.com, Alexander Lobakin , Robin Murphy , Alexander Duyck , Andrew Morton , IOMMU , MM , Alexei Starovoitov , Daniel Borkmann , John Fastabend , Matthias Brugger , AngeloGioacchino Del Regno , netdev@vger.kernel.org, intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-mediatek@lists.infradead.org References: <20250106130116.457938-1-linyunsheng@huawei.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer In-Reply-To: <20250106130116.457938-1-linyunsheng@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailman-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1736260003; bh=AeMg2utTMAlKSbxWiRzE7yu6vRG6PdpdikVVUTzB7Po=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=HYL4fPuUt3YBqyPuBz92sS5jcy/VsnOz6MkBc+Fbk9qHBM2JFQcpjLIB5VduAzKzX Wog6S9U2SOSYofWSlq8OUKbOvKA9Z46TrCntIHu428GAwuyK4bZH0fQxNMzp33Bcn1 WShlsGyIlFWAAqmI6IbMsU3k2+GM7FPDtsN6WV8C3t0InsWrCNNYfQJr5a3LItROi3 WpEwlP8/8JmYS1fDCgkRu7PCzNfBZ2Koe6q8/FFo1HKARb14CWN6XkXP9zLY6Gdc06 lG290+aDphxV1KOFeQxY4EHEag88h0oxdHfkn7a1G0uVf3RHzYAXFyeCJVndgHuCHp q6ystbxVShpDw== X-Mailman-Original-Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=kernel.org X-Mailman-Original-Authentication-Results: smtp1.osuosl.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20201202 header.b=HYL4fPuU Subject: Re: [Intel-wired-lan] [PATCH net-next v6 0/8] fix two bugs related to page_pool X-BeenThere: intel-wired-lan@osuosl.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30 Precedence: list List-Id: Intel Wired Ethernet Linux Kernel Driver Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: intel-wired-lan-bounces@osuosl.org Sender: "Intel-wired-lan" On 06/01/2025 14.01, Yunsheng Lin wrote: > This patchset fix a possible time window problem for page_pool and > the dma API misuse problem as mentioned in [1], and try to avoid the > overhead of the fixing using some optimization. > > From the below performance data, the overhead is not so obvious > due to performance variations for time_bench_page_pool01_fast_path() > and time_bench_page_pool02_ptr_ring, and there is about 20ns overhead > for time_bench_page_pool03_slow() for fixing the bug. > > Before this patchset: > root@(none)$ insmod bench_page_pool_simple.ko > [ 323.367627] bench_page_pool_simple: Loaded > [ 323.448747] time_bench: Type:for_loop Per elem: 0 cycles(tsc) 0.769 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.076997150 sec time_interval:76997150) - (invoke count:100000000 tsc_interval:7699707) > [ 324.812884] time_bench: Type:atomic_inc Per elem: 1 cycles(tsc) 13.468 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:1.346855130 sec time_interval:1346855130) - (invoke count:100000000 tsc_interval:134685507) > [ 324.980875] time_bench: Type:lock Per elem: 1 cycles(tsc) 15.010 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.150101270 sec time_interval:150101270) - (invoke count:10000000 tsc_interval:15010120) > [ 325.652195] time_bench: Type:rcu Per elem: 0 cycles(tsc) 6.542 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.654213000 sec time_interval:654213000) - (invoke count:100000000 tsc_interval:65421294) > [ 325.669215] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool01_fast_path(): Cannot use page_pool fast-path > [ 325.974848] time_bench: Type:no-softirq-page_pool01 Per elem: 2 cycles(tsc) 29.633 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.296338200 sec time_interval:296338200) - (invoke count:10000000 tsc_interval:29633814) (referring to above line, below) > [ 325.993517] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool02_ptr_ring(): Cannot use page_pool fast-path > [ 326.576636] time_bench: Type:no-softirq-page_pool02 Per elem: 5 cycles(tsc) 57.391 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.573911820 sec time_interval:573911820) - (invoke count:10000000 tsc_interval:57391174) > [ 326.595307] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool03_slow(): Cannot use page_pool fast-path > [ 328.422661] time_bench: Type:no-softirq-page_pool03 Per elem: 18 cycles(tsc) 181.849 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:1.818495880 sec time_interval:1818495880) - (invoke count:10000000 tsc_interval:181849581) > [ 328.441681] bench_page_pool_simple: pp_tasklet_handler(): in_serving_softirq fast-path > [ 328.449584] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool01_fast_path(): in_serving_softirq fast-path > [ 328.755031] time_bench: Type:tasklet_page_pool01_fast_path Per elem: 2 cycles(tsc) 29.632 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.296327910 sec time_interval:296327910) - (invoke count:10000000 tsc_interval:29632785) It is strange that fast-path "tasklet_page_pool01_fast_path" isn't faster than above "no-softirq-page_pool01". They are both 29.633 ns. What hardware is this? e.g. the cycle count of 2 cycles(tsc) seem strange. On my testlab hardware Intel CPU E5-1650 v4 @3.60GHz My fast-path numbers say 5.202 ns (18 cycles) for "tasklet_page_pool01_fast_path" Raw data look like this [Tue Jan 7 15:15:18 2025] bench_page_pool_simple: pp_tasklet_handler(): in_serving_softirq fast-path [Tue Jan 7 15:15:18 2025] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool01_fast_path(): in_serving_softirq fast-path [Tue Jan 7 15:15:18 2025] time_bench: Type:tasklet_page_pool01_fast_path Per elem: 18 cycles(tsc) 5.202 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.052020430 sec time_interval:52020430) - (invoke count:10000000 tsc_interval:187272981) [Tue Jan 7 15:15:18 2025] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool02_ptr_ring(): in_serving_softirq fast-path [Tue Jan 7 15:15:19 2025] time_bench: Type:tasklet_page_pool02_ptr_ring Per elem: 55 cycles(tsc) 15.343 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.153438301 sec time_interval:153438301) - (invoke count:10000000 tsc_interval:552378168) [Tue Jan 7 15:15:19 2025] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool03_slow(): in_serving_softirq fast-path [Tue Jan 7 15:15:19 2025] time_bench: Type:tasklet_page_pool03_slow Per elem: 243 cycles(tsc) 67.725 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.677255574 sec time_interval:677255574) - (invoke count:10000000 tsc_interval:2438124315) > [ 328.774308] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool02_ptr_ring(): in_serving_softirq fast-path > [ 329.578579] time_bench: Type:tasklet_page_pool02_ptr_ring Per elem: 7 cycles(tsc) 79.523 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.795236560 sec time_interval:795236560) - (invoke count:10000000 tsc_interval:79523650) > [ 329.597769] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool03_slow(): in_serving_softirq fast-path > [ 331.507501] time_bench: Type:tasklet_page_pool03_slow Per elem: 19 cycles(tsc) 190.104 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:1.901047510 sec time_interval:1901047510) - (invoke count:10000000 tsc_interval:190104743) > > After this patchset: > root@(none)$ insmod bench_page_pool_simple.ko > [ 138.634758] bench_page_pool_simple: Loaded > [ 138.715879] time_bench: Type:for_loop Per elem: 0 cycles(tsc) 0.769 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.076972720 sec time_interval:76972720) - (invoke count:100000000 tsc_interval:7697265) > [ 140.079897] time_bench: Type:atomic_inc Per elem: 1 cycles(tsc) 13.467 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:1.346735370 sec time_interval:1346735370) - (invoke count:100000000 tsc_interval:134673531) > [ 140.247841] time_bench: Type:lock Per elem: 1 cycles(tsc) 15.005 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.150055080 sec time_interval:150055080) - (invoke count:10000000 tsc_interval:15005497) > [ 140.919072] time_bench: Type:rcu Per elem: 0 cycles(tsc) 6.541 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.654125000 sec time_interval:654125000) - (invoke count:100000000 tsc_interval:65412493) > [ 140.936091] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool01_fast_path(): Cannot use page_pool fast-path > [ 141.246985] time_bench: Type:no-softirq-page_pool01 Per elem: 3 cycles(tsc) 30.159 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.301598160 sec time_interval:301598160) - (invoke count:10000000 tsc_interval:30159812) > [ 141.265654] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool02_ptr_ring(): Cannot use page_pool fast-path > [ 141.976265] time_bench: Type:no-softirq-page_pool02 Per elem: 7 cycles(tsc) 70.140 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.701405780 sec time_interval:701405780) - (invoke count:10000000 tsc_interval:70140573) > [ 141.994933] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool03_slow(): Cannot use page_pool fast-path > [ 144.018945] time_bench: Type:no-softirq-page_pool03 Per elem: 20 cycles(tsc) 201.514 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:2.015141210 sec time_interval:2015141210) - (invoke count:10000000 tsc_interval:201514113) > [ 144.037966] bench_page_pool_simple: pp_tasklet_handler(): in_serving_softirq fast-path > [ 144.045870] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool01_fast_path(): in_serving_softirq fast-path > [ 144.205045] time_bench: Type:tasklet_page_pool01_fast_path Per elem: 1 cycles(tsc) 15.005 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.150056510 sec time_interval:150056510) - (invoke count:10000000 tsc_interval:15005645) This 15.005 ns looks like a significant improvement over 29.633 ns > [ 144.224320] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool02_ptr_ring(): in_serving_softirq fast-path > [ 144.916044] time_bench: Type:tasklet_page_pool02_ptr_ring Per elem: 6 cycles(tsc) 68.269 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:0.682693070 sec time_interval:682693070) - (invoke count:10000000 tsc_interval:68269300) > [ 144.935234] bench_page_pool_simple: time_bench_page_pool03_slow(): in_serving_softirq fast-path > [ 146.997684] time_bench: Type:tasklet_page_pool03_slow Per elem: 20 cycles(tsc) 205.376 ns (step:0) - (measurement period time:2.053766310 sec time_interval:2053766310) - (invoke count:10000000 tsc_interval:205376624) > Looks like I should also try out this patchset on my testlab, as this hardware seems significantly different than mine... > 1. https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/8067f204-1380-4d37-8ffd-007fc6f26738@kernel.org/T/ > > CC: Alexander Lobakin > CC: Robin Murphy > CC: Alexander Duyck > CC: Andrew Morton > CC: IOMMU > CC: MM > > Change log: > V6: > 1. Repost based on latest net-next. > 2. Rename page_pool_to_pp() to page_pool_get_pp(). > > V5: > 1. Support unlimit inflight pages. > 2. Add some optimization to avoid the overhead of fixing bug. > > V4: > 1. use scanning to do the unmapping > 2. spilt dma sync skipping into separate patch > > V3: > 1. Target net-next tree instead of net tree. > 2. Narrow the rcu lock as the discussion in v2. > 3. Check the ummapping cnt against the inflight cnt. > > V2: > 1. Add a item_full stat. > 2. Use container_of() for page_pool_to_pp(). > > Yunsheng Lin (8): > page_pool: introduce page_pool_get_pp() API > page_pool: fix timing for checking and disabling napi_local > page_pool: fix IOMMU crash when driver has already unbound > page_pool: support unlimited number of inflight pages > page_pool: skip dma sync operation for inflight pages > page_pool: use list instead of ptr_ring for ring cache > page_pool: batch refilling pages to reduce atomic operation > page_pool: use list instead of array for alloc cache > > drivers/net/ethernet/freescale/fec_main.c | 8 +- > .../ethernet/google/gve/gve_buffer_mgmt_dqo.c | 2 +- > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/iavf/iavf_txrx.c | 6 +- > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/idpf/idpf_txrx.c | 14 +- > drivers/net/ethernet/intel/libeth/rx.c | 2 +- > .../net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en/xdp.c | 3 +- > drivers/net/netdevsim/netdev.c | 6 +- > drivers/net/wireless/mediatek/mt76/mt76.h | 2 +- > include/linux/mm_types.h | 2 +- > include/linux/skbuff.h | 1 + > include/net/libeth/rx.h | 3 +- > include/net/netmem.h | 24 +- > include/net/page_pool/helpers.h | 11 + > include/net/page_pool/types.h | 63 +- > net/core/devmem.c | 4 +- > net/core/netmem_priv.h | 5 +- > net/core/page_pool.c | 660 ++++++++++++++---- > net/core/page_pool_priv.h | 12 +- > 18 files changed, 664 insertions(+), 164 deletions(-) >