From: "Petr Tesařík" <petr@tesarici.cz>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch>
Cc: David Laight <David.Laight@aculab.com>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com>,
Jose Abreu <joabreu@synopsys.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com>,
Chen-Yu Tsai <wens@csie.org>,
Jernej Skrabec <jernej.skrabec@gmail.com>,
Samuel Holland <samuel@sholland.org>,
"open list:STMMAC ETHERNET DRIVER" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"moderated list:ARM/STM32 ARCHITECTURE"
<linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com>,
"moderated list:ARM/STM32 ARCHITECTURE"
<linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"open list:ARM/Allwinner sunXi SoC support"
<linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: stmmac: protect statistics updates with a spinlock
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2024 16:12:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20240108161241.625df103@meshulam.tesarici.cz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <32c4095e-ec33-4059-a8d3-f85e18363c77@lunn.ch>
On Mon, 8 Jan 2024 14:41:10 +0100
Andrew Lunn <andrew@lunn.ch> wrote:
> > > You might want to consider per CPU statistics. Since each CPU has its
> > > own structure of statistics, you don't need atomic.
> > >
> > > The code actually using the statistics then needs to sum up the per
> > > CPU statistics, and using syncp should be sufficient for that.
> >
> > Doesn't that consume rather a lot of memory on systems with
> > 'silly numbers' of cpu?
>
> Systems with silly number of CPUS tend to also have silly amounts of
> memory. We are talking about maybe a dozen u64 here. So the memory
> usage goes from 144 bytes, to 144K for a 1024CPU system. Is 144K
> excessive for such a system?
I'm not even sure it's worth converting _all_ statistic counters to
per-CPU variables. Most of them are already guarded by a lock (either
the queue lock, or NAPI scheduling). Only the hard interrupt counter is
not protected by anything, so it's more like 8k on a 1024-CPU system....
> > Updating an atomic_t is (pretty much) the same as taking a lock.
> > unlock() is also likely to also contain an atomic operation.
> > So if you update more than two atomic_t it is likely that a lock
> > will be faster.
>
> True, but all those 1024 CPUs in your silly system get affected by a
> lock or an atomic. They all need to do something with there L1 and L2
> cache when using atomics. Spending an extra 144K of RAM means the
> other 1023 CPUs don't notice anything at all during the increment
> phase, which could be happening 1M times a second. They only get
> involved when something in user space wants the statistics, so maybe
> once per second from the SNMP agent.
>
> Also, stmmac is not used on silly CPU systems. It used in embedded
> systems. I doubt its integrated into anything with more than 8 CPUs.
I also doubt it as of today, but hey, it seems that more CPU cores is
the future of embedded. Ten years ago, who would have imagined putting
an 8-core CPU into a smartphone? OTOH who would have imagined a
smartphone with 24G of RAM...
Petr T
prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-01-08 15:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-01-05 9:15 [PATCH] net: stmmac: protect statistics updates with a spinlock Petr Tesarik
2024-01-05 9:45 ` Jiri Pirko
2024-01-05 10:25 ` Petr Tesařík
2024-01-05 11:25 ` Jiri Pirko
2024-01-05 9:58 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-01-05 10:34 ` Petr Tesařík
2024-01-05 10:48 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-01-05 11:14 ` Petr Tesařík
2024-01-05 13:27 ` Petr Tesařík
2024-01-05 14:26 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-01-05 14:28 ` Eric Dumazet
2024-01-05 14:45 ` Petr Tesařík
2024-01-05 17:36 ` Andrew Lunn
2024-01-05 18:21 ` Petr Tesařík
2024-01-08 10:34 ` David Laight
2024-01-08 13:41 ` Andrew Lunn
2024-01-08 15:12 ` Petr Tesařík [this message]
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=20240108161241.625df103@meshulam.tesarici.cz \
--to=petr@tesarici.cz \
--cc=David.Laight@aculab.com \
--cc=alexandre.torgue@foss.st.com \
--cc=andrew@lunn.ch \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=jernej.skrabec@gmail.com \
--cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=joabreu@synopsys.com \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-stm32@st-md-mailman.stormreply.com \
--cc=linux-sunxi@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=mcoquelin.stm32@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=samuel@sholland.org \
--cc=wens@csie.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