| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2017 08:17:12 -0800
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH v4 net-next 07/13] mlx4: use order-0 pages for RX
Use of order-3 pages is problematic in some cases.
This patch might add three kinds of regression :
1) a CPU performance regression, but we will add later page
recycling and performance should be back.
2) TCP receiver could grow its receive window slightly slower,
because skb->len/skb->truesize ratio will decrease.
This is mostly ok, we prefer being conservative to not risk OOM,
and eventually tune TCP better in the future.
This is consistent with other drivers using 2048 per ethernet frame.
3) Because we allocate one page per RX slot, we consume more
memory for the ring buffers. XDP already had this constraint anyway.
Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c | 72 +++++++++++++---------------
drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/mlx4_en.h | 5 --
2 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 44 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c
index 0c61c1200f2aec4c74d7403d9ec3ed06821c1bac..069ea09185fb0669d5c1f9b1b88f517b2d69c5ed 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/en_rx.c
@@ -53,38 +53,26 @@
static int mlx4_alloc_pages(struct mlx4_en_priv *priv,
struct mlx4_en_rx_alloc *page_alloc,
const struct mlx4_en_frag_info *frag_info,
- gfp_t _gfp)
+ gfp_t gfp)
{
- int order;
struct page *page;
dma_addr_t dma;
- for (order = priv->rx_page_order; ;) {
- gfp_t gfp = _gfp;
-
- if (order)
- gfp |= __GFP_COMP | __GFP_NOWARN | __GFP_NOMEMALLOC;
- page = alloc_pages(gfp, order);
- if (likely(page))
- break;
- if (--order < 0 ||
- ((PAGE_SIZE << order) < frag_info->frag_size))
- return -ENOMEM;
- }
- dma = dma_map_page(priv->ddev, page, 0, PAGE_SIZE << order,
- priv->dma_dir);
+ page = alloc_page(gfp);
+ if (unlikely(!page))
+ return -ENOMEM;
+ dma = dma_map_page(priv->ddev, page, 0, PAGE_SIZE, priv->dma_dir);
if (unlikely(dma_mapping_error(priv->ddev, dma))) {
put_page(page);
return -ENOMEM;
}
- page_alloc->page_size = PAGE_SIZE << order;
page_alloc->page = page;
page_alloc->dma = dma;
page_alloc->page_offset = 0;
/* Not doing get_page() for each frag is a big win
* on asymetric workloads. Note we can not use atomic_set().
*/
- page_ref_add(page, page_alloc->page_size / frag_info->frag_stride - 1);
+ page_ref_add(page, PAGE_SIZE / frag_info->frag_stride - 1);
return 0;
}
@@ -105,7 +93,7 @@ static int mlx4_en_alloc_frags(struct mlx4_en_priv *priv,
page_alloc[i].page_offset += frag_info->frag_stride;
if (page_alloc[i].page_offset + frag_info->frag_stride <=
- ring_alloc[i].page_size)
+ PAGE_SIZE)
continue;
if (unlikely(mlx4_alloc_pages(priv, &page_alloc[i],
@@ -127,11 +115,10 @@ static int mlx4_en_alloc_frags(struct mlx4_en_priv *priv,
while (i--) {
if (page_alloc[i].page != ring_alloc[i].page) {
dma_unmap_page(priv->ddev, page_alloc[i].dma,
- page_alloc[i].page_size,
- priv->dma_dir);
+ PAGE_SIZE, priv->dma_dir);
page = page_alloc[i].page;
/* Revert changes done by mlx4_alloc_pages */
- page_ref_sub(page, page_alloc[i].page_size /
+ page_ref_sub(page, PAGE_SIZE /
priv->frag_info[i].frag_stride - 1);
put_page(page);
}
@@ -147,8 +134,8 @@ static void mlx4_en_free_frag(struct mlx4_en_priv *priv,
u32 next_frag_end = frags[i].page_offset + 2 * frag_info->frag_stride;
- if (next_frag_end > frags[i].page_size)
- dma_unmap_page(priv->ddev, frags[i].dma, frags[i].page_size,
+ if (next_frag_end > PAGE_SIZE)
+ dma_unmap_page(priv->ddev, frags[i].dma, PAGE_SIZE,
priv->dma_dir);
if (frags[i].page)
@@ -168,9 +155,8 @@ static int mlx4_en_init_allocator(struct mlx4_en_priv *priv,
frag_info, GFP_KERNEL | __GFP_COLD))
goto out;
- en_dbg(DRV, priv, " frag %d allocator: - size:%d frags:%d\n",
- i, ring->page_alloc[i].page_size,
- page_ref_count(ring->page_alloc[i].page));
+ en_dbg(DRV, priv, " frag %d allocator: - frags:%d\n",
+ i, page_ref_count(ring->page_alloc[i].page));
}
return 0;
@@ -180,11 +166,10 @@ static int mlx4_en_init_allocator(struct mlx4_en_priv *priv,
page_alloc = &ring->page_alloc[i];
dma_unmap_page(priv->ddev, page_alloc->dma,
- page_alloc->page_size,
- priv->dma_dir);
+ PAGE_SIZE, priv->dma_dir);
page = page_alloc->page;
/* Revert changes done by mlx4_alloc_pages */
- page_ref_sub(page, page_alloc->page_size /
+ page_ref_sub(page, PAGE_SIZE /
priv->frag_info[i].frag_stride - 1);
put_page(page);
page_alloc->page = NULL;
@@ -206,9 +191,9 @@ static void mlx4_en_destroy_allocator(struct mlx4_en_priv *priv,
i, page_count(page_alloc->page));
dma_unmap_page(priv->ddev, page_alloc->dma,
- page_alloc->page_size, priv->dma_dir);
+ PAGE_SIZE, priv->dma_dir);
while (page_alloc->page_offset + frag_info->frag_stride <
- page_alloc->page_size) {
+ PAGE_SIZE) {
put_page(page_alloc->page);
page_alloc->page_offset += frag_info->frag_stride;
}
@@ -1191,7 +1176,6 @@ void mlx4_en_calc_rx_buf(struct net_device *dev)
* This only works when num_frags == 1.
*/
if (priv->tx_ring_num[TX_XDP]) {
- priv->rx_page_order = 0;
priv->frag_info[0].frag_size = eff_mtu;
/* This will gain efficient xdp frame recycling at the
* expense of more costly truesize accounting
@@ -1201,22 +1185,32 @@ void mlx4_en_calc_rx_buf(struct net_device *dev)
priv->rx_headroom = XDP_PACKET_HEADROOM;
i = 1;
} else {
- int buf_size = 0;
+ int frag_size_max = 2048, buf_size = 0;
+
+ /* should not happen, right ? */
+ if (eff_mtu > PAGE_SIZE + (MLX4_EN_MAX_RX_FRAGS - 1) * 2048)
+ frag_size_max = PAGE_SIZE;
while (buf_size < eff_mtu) {
- int frag_size = eff_mtu - buf_size;
+ int frag_stride, frag_size = eff_mtu - buf_size;
+ int pad, nb;
if (i < MLX4_EN_MAX_RX_FRAGS - 1)
- frag_size = min(frag_size, 2048);
+ frag_size = min(frag_size, frag_size_max);
priv->frag_info[i].frag_size = frag_size;
+ frag_stride = ALIGN(frag_size, SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
+ /* We can only pack 2 1536-bytes frames in on 4K page
+ * Therefore, each frame would consume more bytes (truesize)
+ */
+ nb = PAGE_SIZE / frag_stride;
+ pad = (PAGE_SIZE - nb * frag_stride) / nb;
+ pad &= ~(SMP_CACHE_BYTES - 1);
+ priv->frag_info[i].frag_stride = frag_stride + pad;
- priv->frag_info[i].frag_stride = ALIGN(frag_size,
- SMP_CACHE_BYTES);
buf_size += frag_size;
i++;
}
- priv->rx_page_order = MLX4_EN_ALLOC_PREFER_ORDER;
priv->dma_dir = PCI_DMA_FROMDEVICE;
priv->rx_headroom = 0;
}
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/mlx4_en.h b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/mlx4_en.h
index 608396dc6d95a05cd88bcf054df990298365ecfa..6c80117006edf25de46fe60fd36051ee9b10d3cb 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/mlx4_en.h
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx4/mlx4_en.h
@@ -102,9 +102,6 @@
/* Use the maximum between 16384 and a single page */
#define MLX4_EN_ALLOC_SIZE PAGE_ALIGN(16384)
-#define MLX4_EN_ALLOC_PREFER_ORDER min_t(int, get_order(32768), \
- PAGE_ALLOC_COSTLY_ORDER)
-
#define MLX4_EN_MAX_RX_FRAGS 4
/* Maximum ring sizes */
@@ -256,7 +253,6 @@ struct mlx4_en_rx_alloc {
struct page *page;
dma_addr_t dma;
u32 page_offset;
- u32 page_size;
};
#define MLX4_EN_CACHE_SIZE (2 * NAPI_POLL_WEIGHT)
@@ -579,7 +575,6 @@ struct mlx4_en_priv {
u8 num_frags;
u8 log_rx_info;
u8 dma_dir;
- u8 rx_page_order;
u16 rx_headroom;
struct mlx4_en_tx_ring **tx_ring[MLX4_EN_NUM_TX_TYPES];
--
2.12.0.246.ga2ecc84866-goog
Powered by blists - more mailing lists