From: Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>
To: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
John David Anglin <dave.anglin@bell.net>
Cc: Tom Herbert <therbert@google.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CONFIG_XPS depends on L1_CACHE_BYTES being greater than sizeof(struct xps_map)
Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2015 00:17:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <562AB200.8030209@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <562AAE05.5020300@gmail.com>
On 24.10.2015 00:00, Alexander Duyck wrote:
> On 10/23/2015 02:08 PM, Helge Deller wrote:
>> * Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>:
>>> On Fri, 2015-10-23 at 21:25 +0200, Helge Deller wrote:
>>>
>>>> Then, how about simply changing it to twice of L1_CACHE_BYTES ?
>>>>
>>>> #define XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC ((L1_CACHE_BYTES * 2 - sizeof(struct xps_map)) / sizeof(u16))
>>>
>>>
>>> Seems good to me.
>>
>> Great!
>>
>> Can you then maybe give me an Acked-by or signed-off for the patch below?
>> It further adds a compile-time check to avoid that XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC
>> gets calculated to zero on any architecture - otherwise no queues would
>> be allocated.
>>
>> In addition I would like to push it for v4.3 then through my parisc-tree
>> (after keeping it in for-next for 1-2 days), together with the patch
>> which reduces L1_CACHE_BYTES to 16 on parisc.
>> Would that be OK too?
>>
>> Thanks!
>> Helge
>>
>>
>> [PATCH] net/xps: Increase initial number of xps queues
>>
>> Increase the number of initial allocated xps queues, so that the initial record
>> allocates twice the size of L1_CACHE_BYTES bytes.
>>
>> This change is needed to copy with architectures where L1_CACHE_BYTES is
>> defined to equal or less than 16 bytes.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>
>>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h
>> index 2d15e38..d152788 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
>> @@ -718,7 +718,7 @@ struct xps_map {
>> u16 queues[0];
>> };
>> #define XPS_MAP_SIZE(_num) (sizeof(struct xps_map) + ((_num) * sizeof(u16)))
>> -#define XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC ((L1_CACHE_BYTES - sizeof(struct xps_map)) \
>> +#define XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC ((L1_CACHE_BYTES * 2 - sizeof(struct xps_map)) \
>> / sizeof(u16))
>>
>> /*
>> diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
>> index 6bb6470..f6d6dd1 100644
>> --- a/net/core/dev.c
>> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
>> @@ -1972,6 +1972,8 @@ static struct xps_map *expand_xps_map(struct xps_map *map,
>> int alloc_len = XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC;
>> int i, pos;
>>
>> + BUILD_BUG_ON(XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC == 0);
>> +
>> for (pos = 0; map && pos < map->len; pos++) {
>> if (map->queues[pos] != index)
>> continue;
>>
>>
>
> Rather then leaving a potential bug you could probably rewrite the macro so that it will give you at least 1.
>
> All you need to do is something like the following
> #define XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC \
> ((L1_CACHE_ALIGN(offsetof(struct xps_map, queue[1])) - \
> sizeof(struct xps_map)) / sizeof(u16))
>
> That should give you at least an XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC of 1.
Yes, good idea!
What makes me wonder though (because I have no idea about the XPS code/layer):
How likely is it, that more than 1 (e.g. minimum "X") queues are needed?
E.g. if a typical system needs at least 3 queues, then doesn't it make sense to allocate
at least 3 initially by using queue[3] in your proposed patch above ?
What would "X" be then?
Helge
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-23 22:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <42430464-867C-4E0B-8E95-C6CDB6D8A0B2@bell.net>
[not found] ` <32A3BF6F-B243-4AD4-9AE9-A5F9DAE0270A@bell.net>
[not found] ` <B8E85737-5ECD-4CBE-8730-886B098C5FA4@bell.net>
[not found] ` <trinity-eda7d55d-7234-4b29-a15c-955f8ba0c95e-1445513884942@3capp-gmx-bs32>
[not found] ` <trinity-8980ad10-b889-45cf-8f37-a33ba9cf99ef-1445514797080@3capp-gmx-bs32>
[not found] ` <1445524549.2207.1.camel@HansenPartnership.com>
[not found] ` <5628F868.3040105@bell.net>
2015-10-22 20:00 ` CONFIG_XPS depends on L1_CACHE_BYTES being greater than sizeof(struct xps_map) Helge Deller
2015-10-22 21:37 ` Tom Herbert
2015-10-23 19:21 ` Helge Deller
2015-10-23 22:16 ` Tom Herbert
2015-10-22 21:50 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-10-23 19:25 ` Helge Deller
2015-10-23 20:03 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-10-23 21:08 ` Helge Deller
2015-10-23 21:09 ` Helge Deller
2015-10-23 21:38 ` Eric Dumazet
2015-10-23 22:00 ` Alexander Duyck
2015-10-23 22:17 ` Helge Deller [this message]
2015-10-23 22:40 ` Alexander Duyck
2015-10-24 14:43 ` Helge Deller
2015-10-25 5:41 ` Alexander Duyck
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=562AB200.8030209@gmx.de \
--to=deller@gmx.de \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=alexander.duyck@gmail.com \
--cc=dave.anglin@bell.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=eric.dumazet@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=therbert@google.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).