netdev - Re: [PATCH] net/mlx4_en: ensure rx_desc updating reaches HW before prod db updating

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 27 Jan 2018 20:41:31 +0800
From:   "jianchao.wang" <jianchao.w.wang@...cle.com>
To:     Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
        Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>
Cc:     junxiao.bi@...cle.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/mlx4_en: ensure rx_desc updating reaches HW before
 prod db updating

Hi Tariq

Thanks for your kindly response.
That's really appreciated.

On 01/25/2018 05:54 PM, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> 
> 
> On 25/01/2018 8:25 AM, jianchao.wang wrote:
>> Hi Eric
>>
>> Thanks for you kindly response and suggestion.
>> That's really appreciated.
>>
>> Jianchao
>>
>> On 01/25/2018 11:55 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2018-01-25 at 11:27 +0800, jianchao.wang wrote:
>>>> Hi Tariq
>>>>
>>>> On 01/22/2018 10:12 AM, jianchao.wang wrote:
>>>>>>> On 19/01/2018 5:49 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Fri, 2018-01-19 at 23:16 +0800, jianchao.wang wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Tariq
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Very sad that the crash was reproduced again after applied the patch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Memory barriers vary for different Archs, can you please share more details regarding arch and repro steps?
>>>>> The hardware is HP ProLiant DL380 Gen9/ProLiant DL380 Gen9, BIOS P89 12/27/2015
>>>>> The xen is installed. The crash occurred in DOM0.
>>>>> Regarding to the repro steps, it is a customer's test which does heavy disk I/O over NFS storage without any guest.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What is the finial suggestion on this ?
>>>> If use wmb there, is the performance pulled down ?
> 
> I want to evaluate this effect.
> I agree with Eric, expected impact is restricted, especially after batching the allocations.> 
>>>
>>> Since https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__git.kernel.org_pub_scm_linux_kernel_git_davem_net-2Dnext.git_commit_-3Fid-3Ddad42c3038a59d27fced28ee4ec1d4a891b28155&d=DwICaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=7WdAxUBeiTUTCy8v-7zXyr4qk7sx26ATvfo6QSTvZyQ&m=c0oI8duFkyFBILMQYDsqRApHQrOlLY_2uGiz_utcd7s&s=E4_XKmSI0B63qB0DLQ1EX_fj1bOP78ZdeYADBf33B-k&e=
>>>
>>> we batch allocations, so mlx4_en_refill_rx_buffers() is not called that often.
>>>
>>> I doubt the additional wmb() will have serious impact there.
>>>
> 
> I will test the effect (it'll be beginning of next week).
> I'll update so we can make a more confident decision.
> 
I have also sent patches with wmb and batching allocations to customer and let them check whether the performance is impacted.
And update here asap when get feedback.

> Thanks,
> Tariq
> 
>>>
>> -- 
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-rdma" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__vger.kernel.org_majordomo-2Dinfo.html&d=DwICaQ&c=RoP1YumCXCgaWHvlZYR8PZh8Bv7qIrMUB65eapI_JnE&r=7WdAxUBeiTUTCy8v-7zXyr4qk7sx26ATvfo6QSTvZyQ&m=f0myCdBQoRjaklxGau_S9ZtQKSQYALW9p2MIuTMAEYo&s=447fFu-xZoLvmxdaVhijK6cUk4Jcx7GtBCNddQT4GOQ&e=
>>
>