From: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>,
Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 13/18] net/sched: act_mirred: Move the recursion counter struct netdev_xmit
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2025 12:47:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20250417104736.pD2sMYXv@linutronix.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <75e10631-00a3-405a-b4d8-96b422ffbe41@redhat.com>
+ Ingo/ PeterZ for sched, see below.
On 2025-04-17 10:29:05 [+0200], Paolo Abeni wrote:
>
> How many of such recursion counters do you foresee will be needed?
I audited the static per-CPU variables and I am done with this series. I
need to go through the dynamic allocations of per-CPU but I don't expect
to see any there.
> AFAICS this one does not fit the existing hole anymore; the binary
> layout before this series is:
>
> struct netdev_xmit {
> /* typedef u16 -> __u16 */ short unsigned int recursion;
> /* 2442 2 */
> /* typedef u8 -> __u8 */ unsigned char more;
> /* 2444 1 */
> /* typedef u8 -> __u8 */ unsigned char
> skip_txqueue; /* 2445 1 */
> } net_xmit; /* 2442 4 */
>
> /* XXX 2 bytes hole, try to pack */
>
> and this series already added 2 u8 fields. Since all the recursion
> counters could be represented with less than 8 bits, perhaps using a
> bitfield here could be worthy?!?
The u8 is nice as the CPU can access in one go. The :4 counting fields
(or so) are usually loaded and shifted so there is a bit more assembly.
We should be able to shorten "recursion" down to an u8 as goes to 8
only.
I still used holes according to pahole on my RT build (the non-RT
shouldn't change):
Before the series:
task_struct:
| /* XXX 5 bits hole, try to pack */
| /* Bitfield combined with next fields */
|
| struct netdev_xmit net_xmit; /* 2378 4 */
|
| /* XXX 2 bytes hole, try to pack */
|
| long unsigned int atomic_flags; /* 2384 8 */
struct netdev_xmit {
| u16 recursion; /* 0 2 */
| u8 more; /* 2 1 */
| u8 skip_txqueue; /* 3 1 */
|
| /* size: 4, cachelines: 1, members: 3 */
| /* last cacheline: 4 bytes */
after the series:
| unsigned int in_nf_duplicate:1; /* 2376:11 4 */
| /* XXX 4 bits hole, try to pack */
| /* Bitfield combined with next fields */
|
| struct netdev_xmit net_xmit; /* 2378 6 */
| long unsigned int atomic_flags; /* 2384 8 */
struct netdev_xmit
| u16 recursion; /* 0 2 */
| u8 more; /* 2 1 */
| u8 skip_txqueue; /* 3 1 */
| u8 nf_dup_skb_recursion; /* 4 1 */
| u8 sched_mirred_nest; /* 5 1 */
|
| /* size: 6, cachelines: 1, members: 5 */
| /* last cacheline: 6 bytes */
I don't understand why in the first case there is a warning about a 2
byte hole while there is a 4 byte hole due to the long alignment.
After the series there is still a 2 byte hole before atomic_flags.
> In any case I think we need explicit ack from the sched people.
I added PeterZ and Ingo.
> > diff --git a/net/sched/act_mirred.c b/net/sched/act_mirred.c
> > index 5b38143659249..5f01f567c934d 100644
> > --- a/net/sched/act_mirred.c
> > +++ b/net/sched/act_mirred.c
> > @@ -30,7 +30,29 @@ static LIST_HEAD(mirred_list);
> > static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(mirred_list_lock);
> >
> > #define MIRRED_NEST_LIMIT 4
> > -static DEFINE_PER_CPU(unsigned int, mirred_nest_level);
> > +
> > +#ifndef CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT
> > +static u8 tcf_mirred_nest_level_inc_return(void)
> > +{
> > + return __this_cpu_inc_return(softnet_data.xmit.sched_mirred_nest);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void tcf_mirred_nest_level_dec(void)
> > +{
> > + __this_cpu_dec(softnet_data.xmit.sched_mirred_nest);
> > +}
> > +
> > +#else
> > +static u8 tcf_mirred_nest_level_inc_return(void)
> > +{
> > + return current->net_xmit.sched_mirred_nest++;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void tcf_mirred_nest_level_dec(void)
> > +{
> > + current->net_xmit.sched_mirred_nest--;
> > +}
> > +#endif
>
> There are already a few of this construct. Perhaps it would be worthy to
> implement a netdev_xmit() helper returning a ptr to the whole struct and
> use it to reduce the number of #ifdef
While I introduced this in the beginning, Jakub asked if there would be
much difference doing this and I said on x86 at least one opcode because
it replaces "var++" with "get-var, inc-var". I didn't hear back on this
so I assumed "keep it".
If you want the helper, then just say if you want it at the begin of the
series, at the end or independent for evaluation purpose and I make it.
> Thanks,
>
> Paolo
Sebastian
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-17 10:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-14 16:07 [PATCH net-next v2 00/18] net: Cover more per-CPU storage with local nested BH locking Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-14 16:07 ` [PATCH net-next v2 01/18] net: page_pool: Don't recycle into cache on PREEMPT_RT Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-14 16:07 ` [PATCH net-next v2 02/18] net: dst_cache: Use nested-BH locking for dst_cache::cache Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-14 16:07 ` [PATCH net-next v2 03/18] ipv4/route: Use this_cpu_inc() for stats on PREEMPT_RT Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-14 16:07 ` [PATCH net-next v2 04/18] ipv6: sr: Use nested-BH locking for hmac_storage Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-14 16:07 ` [PATCH net-next v2 05/18] xdp: Use nested-BH locking for system_page_pool Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-14 16:07 ` [PATCH net-next v2 06/18] netfilter: nf_dup{4, 6}: Move duplication check to task_struct Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-29 9:23 ` Peter Zijlstra
2025-04-14 16:07 ` [PATCH net-next v2 07/18] netfilter: nft_inner: Use nested-BH locking for nft_pcpu_tun_ctx Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-14 16:07 ` [PATCH net-next v2 08/18] netfilter: nf_dup_netdev: Move the recursion counter struct netdev_xmit Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-14 16:07 ` [PATCH net-next v2 09/18] xfrm: Use nested-BH locking for nat_keepalive_sk_ipv[46] Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-14 16:07 ` [PATCH net-next v2 10/18] openvswitch: Merge three per-CPU structures into one Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-14 16:07 ` [PATCH net-next v2 11/18] openvswitch: Use nested-BH locking for ovs_pcpu_storage Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-14 16:07 ` [PATCH net-next v2 12/18] openvswitch: Move ovs_frag_data_storage into the struct ovs_pcpu_storage Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-15 16:26 ` Aaron Conole
2025-04-16 16:45 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-17 8:01 ` Paolo Abeni
2025-04-17 9:08 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-17 9:48 ` Paolo Abeni
2025-04-17 10:18 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-17 15:07 ` Aaron Conole
2025-04-14 16:07 ` [PATCH net-next v2 13/18] net/sched: act_mirred: Move the recursion counter struct netdev_xmit Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-17 8:29 ` Paolo Abeni
2025-04-17 10:47 ` Sebastian Andrzej Siewior [this message]
2025-04-17 11:31 ` Paolo Abeni
2025-04-14 16:07 ` [PATCH net-next v2 14/18] net/sched: Use nested-BH locking for sch_frag_data_storage Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-14 16:07 ` [PATCH net-next v2 15/18] mptcp: Use nested-BH locking for hmac_storage Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-14 16:07 ` [PATCH net-next v2 16/18] rds: Disable only bottom halves in rds_page_remainder_alloc() Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-14 16:07 ` [PATCH net-next v2 17/18] rds: Acquire per-CPU pointer within BH disabled section Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
2025-04-14 16:07 ` [PATCH net-next v2 18/18] rds: Use nested-BH locking for rds_page_remainder Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
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=20250417104736.pD2sMYXv@linutronix.de \
--to=bigeasy@linutronix.de \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=jhs@mojatatu.com \
--cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-rt-devel@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com \
/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).