From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>
To: Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>,
linux-parisc@vger.kernel.org,
James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com>,
John David Anglin <dave.anglin@bell.net>,
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 22:41:47 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <562C6B9B.3090804@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20151024144312.GA26373@ls3530.box>
On 10/24/2015 07:43 AM, Helge Deller wrote:
> * Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@gmail.com>:
>> On 10/23/2015 03:17 PM, Helge Deller wrote:
>>> 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?
>>
>> The question I would have is in how many cases it it likely that somebody
>> would enable this feature and point a given CPU at more than one queue. I
>> know the Intel drivers that make use of XPS tend to do a 1:1 mapping for
>> their ATR feature. I would think if anything most CPUs would probably be
>> mapped many:1, but you probably won't have all that many cases where it is
>> 1:many or many:many.
>>
>> I'd say starting with at least 1 should be fine. Worst case scenario is we
>> have to make a couple more calls to expand_xps_map which will likely occur
>> as a slow path and infrequent event anyway.
>
> Ok, can I get then the signed-off or acked-by from you for this patch?
>
> Thanks,
> Helge
>
>
> [PATCH] net/xps: Fix calculation of initial number of xps queues
>
> The existing code breaks on architectures where the L1 cache size
> (L1_CACHE_BYTES) is smaller or equal the size of struct xps_map.
>
> The new code ensures that we get at minimum one initial xps queue, or
> even more as long as it fits into the next multiple of L1_CACHE_SIZE.
>
> Signed-off-by: Helge Deller <deller@gmx.de>
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> index 2d15e38..2212c82 100644
> --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
> +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> @@ -718,8 +718,8 @@ 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)) \
> - / sizeof(u16))
> +#define XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC ((L1_CACHE_ALIGN(offsetof(struct xps_map, queues[1])) \
> + - sizeof(struct xps_map)) / sizeof(u16))
>
> /*
> * This structure holds all XPS maps for device. Maps are indexed by CPU.
>
This looks good to me.
Acked-by: Alexander Duyck <aduyck@mirantis.com>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-10-25 5:41 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
2015-10-23 22:40 ` Alexander Duyck
2015-10-24 14:43 ` Helge Deller
2015-10-25 5:41 ` Alexander Duyck [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=562C6B9B.3090804@gmail.com \
--to=alexander.duyck@gmail.com \
--cc=James.Bottomley@HansenPartnership.com \
--cc=dave.anglin@bell.net \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=deller@gmx.de \
--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).