From: gregory.clement@free-electrons.com (Gregory CLEMENT)
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH 2/2] net: mvneta: Add naive RSS support
Date: Fri, 06 Nov 2015 21:53:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87y4ea7stn.fsf@free-electrons.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPv3WKecZuSfk4LpCehWoijiA6Ea306qn5iyNbg4TucYuOZauw@mail.gmail.com> (Marcin Wojtas's message of "Fri, 6 Nov 2015 20:15:31 +0100")
Hi Marcin,
[...]
>> +static int mvneta_config_rss(struct mvneta_port *pp)
>> +{
>> + int cpu;
>> + u32 val;
>> +
>> + netif_tx_stop_all_queues(pp->dev);
>> +
>> + /* Mask all ethernet port interrupts */
>> + mvreg_write(pp, MVNETA_INTR_NEW_MASK, 0);
>
> Shouldn't the interrupts be masked on each online cpu? There is percpu
> unmask function (mvneta_percpu_unmask_interrupt), so maybe ther should
> be also mvneta_percpu_mask_interrupt. With this masking should look
> like below:
>
> for_each_online_cpu(cpu)
> smp_call_function_single(cpu, mvneta_percpu_unmask_interrupt,
> pp, true);
Indeed you are right, however I am a bit surprised to not had had issue
cause by this. I will fix it.
>
>> + mvreg_write(pp, MVNETA_INTR_OLD_MASK, 0);
>> + mvreg_write(pp, MVNETA_INTR_MISC_MASK, 0);
>> +
>> + /* We have to synchronise on the napi of each CPU */
>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>> + struct mvneta_pcpu_port *pcpu_port =
>> + per_cpu_ptr(pp->ports, cpu);
>> +
>> + napi_synchronize(&pcpu_port->napi);
>> + napi_disable(&pcpu_port->napi);
>> + }
>> +
>> + pp->rxq_def = pp->indir[0];
>> +
>> + /* update unicast mapping */
>> + mvneta_set_rx_mode(pp->dev);
>> +
>> + /* Update val of portCfg register accordingly with all RxQueue types */
>> + val = MVNETA_PORT_CONFIG_DEFL_VALUE(pp->rxq_def);
>> + mvreg_write(pp, MVNETA_PORT_CONFIG, val);
>> +
>> + /* Update the elected CPU matching the new rxq_def */
>> + mvneta_percpu_elect(pp);
>> +
>> + /* We have to synchronise on the napi of each CPU */
>> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
>> + struct mvneta_pcpu_port *pcpu_port =
>> + per_cpu_ptr(pp->ports, cpu);
>> +
>> + napi_enable(&pcpu_port->napi);
>> + }
>> +
>
> rxq_def changed, but txq vs CPU mapping remained as in the beginning -
> is it intentional?
txq vs CPU mapping is change in the mvneta_percpu_elect() function.
Thanks for this prompt review
Gregory
--
Gregory Clement, Free Electrons
Kernel, drivers, real-time and embedded Linux
development, consulting, training and support.
http://free-electrons.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-11-06 20:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-11-06 18:35 [RFC PATCH 0/2] net: mvneta: Introduce RSS support Gregory CLEMENT
2015-11-06 18:35 ` [RFC PATCH 1/2] net: mvneta: Associate RX queues with each CPU Gregory CLEMENT
2015-11-06 18:35 ` [RFC PATCH 2/2] net: mvneta: Add naive RSS support Gregory CLEMENT
2015-11-06 19:15 ` Marcin Wojtas
2015-11-06 20:53 ` Gregory CLEMENT [this message]
2015-11-06 19:37 ` [RFC PATCH 0/2] net: mvneta: Introduce " Marcin Wojtas
2015-11-09 18:19 ` Gregory CLEMENT
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=87y4ea7stn.fsf@free-electrons.com \
--to=gregory.clement@free-electrons.com \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).