From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To: David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com>
Cc: Chris Friesen <cfriesen@nortel.com>,
netdev@vger.kernel.org,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
linux-mips <linux-mips@linux-mips.org>
Subject: Re: Irq architecture for multi-core network driver.
Date: Fri, 23 Oct 2009 00:59:03 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m13a5apmm0.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4AE0DB98.1000101@caviumnetworks.com> (David Daney's message of "Thu\, 22 Oct 2009 15\:24\:24 -0700")
David Daney <ddaney@caviumnetworks.com> writes:
> Chris Friesen wrote:
>> On 10/22/2009 03:40 PM, David Daney wrote:
>>
>>> The main problem I have encountered is how to fit the interrupt
>>> management into the kernel framework. Currently the interrupt source
>>> is connected to a single irq number. I request_irq, and then manage
>>> the masking and unmasking on a per cpu basis by directly manipulating
>>> the interrupt controller's affinity/routing registers. This goes
>>> behind the back of all the kernel's standard interrupt management
>>> routines. I am looking for a better approach.
>>>
>>> One thing that comes to mind is that I could assign a different
>>> interrupt number per cpu to the interrupt signal. So instead of
>>> having one irq I would have 32 of them. The driver would then do
>>> request_irq for all 32 irqs, and could call enable_irq and disable_irq
>>> to enable and disable them. The problem with this is that there isn't
>>> really a single packets-ready signal, but instead 16 of them. So If I
>>> go this route I would have 16(lines) x 32(cpus) = 512 interrupt
>>> numbers just for the networking hardware, which seems a bit excessive.
>>
>> Does your hardware do flow-based queues? In this model you have
>> multiple rx queues and the hardware hashes incoming packets to a single
>> queue based on the addresses, ports, etc. This ensures that all the
>> packets of a single connection always get processed in the order they
>> arrived at the net device.
>>
>
> Indeed, this is exactly what we have.
>
>
>> Typically in this model you have as many interrupts as queues
>> (presumably 16 in your case). Each queue is assigned an interrupt and
>> that interrupt is affined to a single core.
>
> Certainly this is one mode of operation that should be supported, but I would
> also like to be able to go for raw throughput and have as many cores as possible
> reading from a single queue (like I currently have).
I believe will detect false packet drops and ask for unnecessary
retransmits if you have multiple cores processing a single queue,
because you are processing the packets out of order.
Eric
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-23 7:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-22 21:40 Irq architecture for multi-core network driver David Daney
2009-10-22 22:05 ` Chris Friesen
2009-10-22 22:24 ` David Daney
2009-10-23 7:59 ` Eric W. Biederman [this message]
2009-10-23 17:28 ` Jesse Brandeburg
2009-10-23 23:22 ` Eric W. Biederman
2009-10-24 13:26 ` David Miller
2009-10-24 3:19 ` David Miller
2009-10-24 13:23 ` David Miller
2009-12-16 22:08 ` Chetan Loke
2009-12-16 22:30 ` David Daney
2009-12-16 23:00 ` Stephen Hemminger
2009-12-16 23:26 ` David Daney
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=m13a5apmm0.fsf@fess.ebiederm.org \
--to=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=cfriesen@nortel.com \
--cc=ddaney@caviumnetworks.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mips@linux-mips.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).