public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Benjamin LaHaise <bcrl@kvack.org>
To: Jon Mason <mason@myri.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@suse.de>,
	Jesse Barnes <jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org>,
	Bjorn Helgaas <bhelgaas@google.com>,
	Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-pci@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] pci: Clamp pcie_set_readrq() when using "performance" settings
Date: Tue, 4 Oct 2011 11:37:12 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20111004153711.GF19130@kvack.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20111004144215.GE19130@kvack.org>

On Tue, Oct 04, 2011 at 10:42:15AM -0400, Benjamin LaHaise wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 03, 2011 at 04:55:48PM -0500, Jon Mason wrote:
> > From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
> > 
> > When configuring the PCIe settings for "performance", we allow parents
> > to have a larger Max Payload Size than children and rely on children
> > Max Read Request Size to not be larger than their own MPS to avoid
> > having the host bridge generate responses they can't cope with.
> 
> I'm pretty sure that simply will not work, and is an incorrect understanding 
> of how PCIe bridges and devices interact with regards to transaction size 
> limits.  Here's why: I am actually implementing a PCIe nic on an FPGA at 
> present, and have just been in the process of tuning how memory read 
> requests are issued and processed.  It is perfectly valid for a PCIe 
> endpoint to issue a read request for an entire 4KB block (assuming it 
> respects the no 4KB boundary crossings rule), even when the MPS setting 
> is only 64 or 128 bytes.  However, the root complex or PCIe bridge *must 
> not* exceed the Maximum Payload Size for any completions with data or 
> posted writes.  Multiple completions are okay and expected for read 
> requests.  If the MPS on the bridge is set to a larger value than 
> what all of the endpoints connected to it, the bridge or root complex will 
> happily send read completions exceeding the endpoint's MPS.  This can and 
> will lead to failure on the parts of endpoints.

Just to clarify, my main concern is that restricting the size of read 
requests will impact performance negatively, for things like network tx.  
Issuing small reads for network tx made a huge impact on transmit 
performance, while also constraining rx performance in a full duplex 
scenario.  It also leaves the door open to incorrect behaviour in the 
cast of posted writes (think of memcpy_toio()) since the write MPS is 
incorrect.

		-ben

  reply	other threads:[~2011-10-04 15:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-10-03 14:50 [PATCH 2/3] pci: Clamp pcie_set_readrq() when using "performance" settings Jon Mason
2011-10-03 20:56 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-10-04 15:40   ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-10-04 15:48     ` Linus Torvalds
2011-10-04 15:56       ` Bjorn Helgaas
2011-10-04 16:08       ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-10-04 16:51         ` Linus Torvalds
2011-10-04 17:30           ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-10-04 17:36             ` Linus Torvalds
2011-10-05  7:01               ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-10-05 14:49                 ` Linus Torvalds
2011-10-05 16:26                   ` Jesse Barnes
2011-10-04 17:41             ` Benjamin LaHaise
2011-10-03 21:55 ` Jon Mason
2011-10-04 14:42   ` Benjamin LaHaise
2011-10-04 15:37     ` Benjamin LaHaise [this message]
2011-10-04 15:52     ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-10-04 15:59       ` Benjamin LaHaise
2011-10-04 16:19         ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-10-04 16:44           ` Benjamin LaHaise

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=20111004153711.GF19130@kvack.org \
    --to=bcrl@kvack.org \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=bhelgaas@google.com \
    --cc=gregkh@suse.de \
    --cc=jbarnes@virtuousgeek.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-pci@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mason@myri.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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