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 vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BB6EAC61DA3 for ; Tue, 21 Feb 2023 18:41:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229606AbjBUSlb (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2023 13:41:31 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:40082 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229491AbjBUSla (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Feb 2023 13:41:30 -0500 Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.156.1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBD4A2CFDD; Tue, 21 Feb 2023 10:41:28 -0800 (PST) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098396.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 31LHmLYt028841; Tue, 21 Feb 2023 18:41:25 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ibm.com; h=message-id : date : mime-version : subject : to : cc : references : from : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=pp1; bh=aRaKSdT5YOBdcMF/VLFz0L/jS/JhEWljAvedK9bydJo=; b=BbtVlqoFbjd5pJy9qOcweEirj8OZeKm200PQuuYV4wx2i/EYIX/Zlr4l6bW8eKN122+0 p0eLqUJZ+bgB3xSAvFNPQeio3PpXWrv2vkpJgECbvHYf++IEUwIPVJMq04VCBVmL4lhI 30eZmfn9h0deue/mQ6aQW+NKT00KdT7o7RAnHKg55GuzUr1htSOqqpelGjTCxA0aZMOI auOUT7yty7PSuJ2mWCEX94zSchCzd/dJpnyPYUlDlhngmhsWkPM5O2P2JwKO2vSxhc3D byUx0pPzm2JlqErUN8mjIFOFNTuZdODDYUghSch94ugib3gpZm/EgnQqj0QHTaC1P/Dl oQ== Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3nw11rku82-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 21 Feb 2023 18:41:25 +0000 Received: from m0098396.ppops.net (m0098396.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.17.1.5/8.17.1.5) with ESMTP id 31LIM4BU019879; Tue, 21 Feb 2023 18:41:24 GMT Received: from ppma01dal.us.ibm.com (83.d6.3fa9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.63.214.131]) by mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3nw11rku7q-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 21 Feb 2023 18:41:24 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma01dal.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma01dal.us.ibm.com (8.17.1.19/8.17.1.19) with ESMTP id 31LIZHb5011387; Tue, 21 Feb 2023 18:41:23 GMT Received: from smtprelay03.dal12v.mail.ibm.com ([9.208.130.98]) by ppma01dal.us.ibm.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 3ntpa7h5nb-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 21 Feb 2023 18:41:23 +0000 Received: from smtpav05.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (smtpav05.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com [10.39.53.232]) by smtprelay03.dal12v.mail.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 31LIfLCG10158792 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 21 Feb 2023 18:41:22 GMT Received: from smtpav05.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99FA958061; Tue, 21 Feb 2023 18:41:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: from smtpav05.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 19D2A58043; Tue, 21 Feb 2023 18:41:20 +0000 (GMT) Received: from [9.163.71.13] (unknown [9.163.71.13]) by smtpav05.wdc07v.mail.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Tue, 21 Feb 2023 18:41:19 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: <23f7bd14-9a5a-6fa2-ed54-fada276ec2a5@linux.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2023 19:41:19 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.8.0 Subject: Re: [net-next 0/2] Deliver confirm/delete rkey message in parallel To: "D. Wythe" , kgraul@linux.ibm.com, jaka@linux.ibm.com Cc: kuba@kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, linux-rdma@vger.kernel.org References: <1675755374-107598-1-git-send-email-alibuda@linux.alibaba.com> <04e65f58-3ef3-6f5a-6f95-35d5b1555c7e@linux.alibaba.com> <51391bb7-9334-ea24-7a93-e2f1847d7ce8@linux.alibaba.com> From: Wenjia Zhang In-Reply-To: <51391bb7-9334-ea24-7a93-e2f1847d7ce8@linux.alibaba.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: I5lygg7C1hM-ze8dKQvAsInqrAgNFP8O X-Proofpoint-GUID: qM5YGueBuVXbW7ITVL9TRT4sUdtxThd1 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.219,Aquarius:18.0.930,Hydra:6.0.562,FMLib:17.11.170.22 definitions=2023-02-21_11,2023-02-20_02,2023-02-09_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 suspectscore=0 adultscore=0 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 bulkscore=0 clxscore=1015 priorityscore=1501 lowpriorityscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 phishscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2212070000 definitions=main-2302210158 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-s390@vger.kernel.org On 08.02.23 04:09, D. Wythe wrote: > > > On 2/8/23 11:04 AM, D. Wythe wrote: >> >> >> On 2/8/23 7:29 AM, Wenjia Zhang wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 07.02.23 08:36, D. Wythe wrote: >>>> From: "D. Wythe" >>>> >>>> According to the SMC protocol specification, we know that all flows >>>> except >>>> confirm_rkey adn delete_rkey are exclusive, confirm/delete rkey flows >>>> can run concurrently (local and remote). >>>> >>>> However, although the protocol allows, all flows are actually mutually >>>> exclusive in implementation, deus to we are waiting for LLC message >>>> in serial. >>>> >>>> On the one hand, this implementation does not conform to the protocol >>>> specification, on the other hand, this implementation aggravates the >>>> time for establishing or destroying a SMC-R connection, connection >>>> have to be queued in smc_llc_wait. >>>> >>>> This patch will improve the performance of the short link scenario >>>> by about 5%. In fact, we all know that the performance bottleneck >>>> of the short link scenario is not here. >>>> >>>> This patch try use rtokens or rkey to correlate a confirm/delete >>>> rkey message with its response. >>>> >>>> This patch contains two parts. >>>> >>>> At first, we have added the process >>>> of asynchronously waiting for the response of confirm/delete rkey >>>> messages, using rtokens or rkey to be correlate with. >>>> >>>> And then, we try to send confirm/delete rkey message in parallel, >>>> allowing parallel execution of start (remote) or initialization (local) >>>> SMC_LLC_FLOW_RKEY flows. >>>> >>>> D. Wythe (2): >>>>    net/smc: allow confirm/delete rkey response deliver multiplex >>>>    net/smc: make SMC_LLC_FLOW_RKEY run concurrently >>>> >>>>   net/smc/smc_core.h |   1 + >>>>   net/smc/smc_llc.c  | 263 >>>> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------ >>>>   net/smc/smc_llc.h  |   6 ++ >>>>   net/smc/smc_wr.c   |  10 -- >>>>   net/smc/smc_wr.h   |  10 ++ >>>>   5 files changed, 220 insertions(+), 70 deletions(-) >>>> >>> >>> As we already discussed, on this changes we need to test them >>> carefully so that we have to be sure that the communicating with z/OS >>> should not be broken. We'll let you know as soon as the testing is >>> finished. >> >> >> Hi, Wenjia >> >> Thanks again for your test. >> >> Considering that we have reached an agreement on protocol extension, >> we can temporarily postpone this modification until we introduce the >> protocol extension >> into the Linux community version. Then we can avoid the compatibility >> with z/OS. >> >> >> Best wishes. >> D. Wythe >> > > We can temporarily postpone this modification until we introduce the > protocol extension > into the Linux community version IF we can't pass the z/OS compatible > test. :-) > > Sorry for the problem in my description. > > Thanks. > D. Wythe > Sorry that it took a bit lang to test. But it looks good to me. Please let me know if you still want to postpone it. Best Wenjia