From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ipv6: do lazy dst->__use update when per cpu
 dst is available
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2017 12:34:12 +0200
Message-ID: <1506594852.2711.33.camel@redhat.com>
References: <9d32116e61596b0de6a584b6cf05cae3ce7abb56.1506532145.git.pabeni@redhat.com>
         <CAEA6p_DZxGesjymubWoWx7hQjaZ7Vdchh=cdOW9tAr4F7QvzXg@mail.gmail.com>
         <CANn89iJ0t8Vpukak3WEOA1x4M4hk-Z9hDkcSqG9+7qLsbuJQZg@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@fb.com>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@stressinduktion.org>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>, Wei Wang <weiwan@google.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:36676 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1752580AbdI1KeP (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
        Thu, 28 Sep 2017 06:34:15 -0400
In-Reply-To: <CANn89iJ0t8Vpukak3WEOA1x4M4hk-Z9hDkcSqG9+7qLsbuJQZg@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, 2017-09-27 at 11:03 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c
> > 
> > Hi Paolo,
> > 
> > Eric and I discussed about this issue recently as well :).
> > 
> > What about the following change:
> > 
> > diff --git a/include/net/dst.h b/include/net/dst.h
> > index 93568bd0a352..33e1d86bcef6 100644
> > --- a/include/net/dst.h
> > +++ b/include/net/dst.h
> > @@ -258,14 +258,18 @@ static inline void dst_hold(struct dst_entry *dst)
> >  static inline void dst_use(struct dst_entry *dst, unsigned long time)
> >  {
> >         dst_hold(dst);
> > -       dst->__use++;
> > -       dst->lastuse = time;
> > +       if (dst->lastuse != time) {
> > +               dst->__use++;
> > +               dst->lastuse = time;
> > +       }
> >  }
> > 
> >  static inline void dst_use_noref(struct dst_entry *dst, unsigned long time)
> >  {
> > -       dst->__use++;
> > -       dst->lastuse = time;
> > +       if (dst->lastuse != time) {
> > +               dst->__use++;
> > +               dst->lastuse = time;
> > +       }
> >  }
> > 
> >  static inline struct dst_entry *dst_clone(struct dst_entry *dst)
> > diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c
> > index 26cc9f483b6d..e195f093add3 100644
> > --- a/net/ipv6/route.c
> > +++ b/net/ipv6/route.c
> > @@ -1170,8 +1170,7 @@ struct rt6_info *ip6_pol_route(struct net *net,
> > struct fib6_table *table,
> > 
> >                 struct rt6_info *pcpu_rt;
> > 
> > -               rt->dst.lastuse = jiffies;
> > -               rt->dst.__use++;
> > +               dst_use_noref(rt, jiffies);
> >                 pcpu_rt = rt6_get_pcpu_route(rt);
> > 
> >                 if (pcpu_rt) {
> > 
> > 
> > This way we always only update dst->__use and dst->lastuse at most
> > once per jiffy. And we don't really need to update pcpu and then do
> > the copy over from pcpu_rt to rt operation.
> > 
> > Another thing is that I don't really see any places making use of
> > dst->__use. So maybe we can also get rid of this dst->__use field?
> > 
> > Thanks.
> > Wei
> 
> Paolo, given we are very close to send Wei awesome work about IPv6
> routing cache,
> could we ask you to wait few days before doing the same work from your side ?

Ok, no problem - thanks instead. I'll wait for it. 

> Main issue is the rwlock, and we are converting it to full RCU.
> 
> You are sending patches that are making our job very difficult IMO.

On my side I have only another small change in this area, I'll
eventually try to rebase it later, if still relevant.

Or I can share it now, if you are interested.

Cheers,

Paolo