linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] RDMA/core: reduce IB_POLL

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

Message-ID: <193aaf91-c9d1-38b1-a89f-45f129ca5798@mellanox.com>
Date:   Wed, 28 Feb 2018 00:15:56 +0200
From:   Max Gurtovoy <maxg@...lanox.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>
CC:     Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@...cle.com>,
        Bart Van Assche <Bart.VanAssche@....com>,
        "arnd@...db.de" <arnd@...db.de>,
        "dledford@...hat.com" <dledford@...hat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "leonro@...lanox.com" <leonro@...lanox.com>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] RDMA/core: reduce IB_POLL_BATCH constant



On 2/28/2018 12:09 AM, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 05:39:09PM +0200, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
>>
>>>> The only reason why I added this array on-stack was to allow consumers
>>>> that did not use ib_alloc_cq api to call it, but that seems like a
>>>> wrong decision when thinking it over again (as probably these users
>>>> did not set the wr_cqe correctly).
>>>>
>>>> How about we make ib_process_cq_direct use the cq wc array and add
>>>> a WARN_ON statement (and fail it gracefully) if the caller used this
>>>> API without calling ib_alloc_cq?
>>>
>>> but we tried to avoid cuncurrent access to cq->wc.
>>
>> Not sure its a valid use-case. But if there is a compelling
>> reason to keep it as is, then we can do smaller on-stack
>> array.
> 
> Did we come to a conclusion what to do here?

guys,
what do you think about the following solution (untested):


diff --git a/drivers/infiniband/core/cq.c b/drivers/infiniband/core/cq.c
index bc79ca8..59d2835 100644
--- a/drivers/infiniband/core/cq.c
+++ b/drivers/infiniband/core/cq.c
@@ -17,6 +17,7 @@

  /* # of WCs to poll for with a single call to ib_poll_cq */
  #define IB_POLL_BATCH                  16
+#define IB_POLL_BATCH_DIRECT           8

  /* # of WCs to iterate over before yielding */
  #define IB_POLL_BUDGET_IRQ             256
@@ -25,17 +26,25 @@
  #define IB_POLL_FLAGS \
         (IB_CQ_NEXT_COMP | IB_CQ_REPORT_MISSED_EVENTS)

-static int __ib_process_cq(struct ib_cq *cq, int budget, struct ib_wc 
*poll_wc)
+static int __ib_process_cq(struct ib_cq *cq, int budget, struct ib_wc 
*poll_wc,
+                          int batch)
  {
-       int i, n, completed = 0;
-       struct ib_wc *wcs = poll_wc ? : cq->wc;
-
+       int i, n, ib_poll_batch, completed = 0;
+       struct ib_wc *wcs;
+
+       if (poll_wc) {
+               wcs = poll_wc;
+               ib_poll_batch = batch;
+       } else {
+               wcs = cq->wc;
+               ib_poll_batch = IB_POLL_BATCH;
+       }
         /*
          * budget might be (-1) if the caller does not
          * want to bound this call, thus we need unsigned
          * minimum here.
          */
-       while ((n = ib_poll_cq(cq, min_t(u32, IB_POLL_BATCH,
+       while ((n = ib_poll_cq(cq, min_t(u32, ib_poll_batch,
                         budget - completed), wcs)) > 0) {
                 for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
                         struct ib_wc *wc = &wcs[i];
@@ -48,7 +57,7 @@ static int __ib_process_cq(struct ib_cq *cq, int 
budget, struct ib_wc *poll_wc)

                 completed += n;

-               if (n != IB_POLL_BATCH ||
+               if (n != ib_poll_batch ||
                     (budget != -1 && completed >= budget))
                         break;
         }
@@ -72,9 +81,9 @@ static int __ib_process_cq(struct ib_cq *cq, int 
budget, struct ib_wc *poll_wc)
   */
  int ib_process_cq_direct(struct ib_cq *cq, int budget)
  {
-       struct ib_wc wcs[IB_POLL_BATCH];
+       struct ib_wc wcs[IB_POLL_BATCH_DIRECT];

-       return __ib_process_cq(cq, budget, wcs);
+       return __ib_process_cq(cq, budget, wcs, IB_POLL_BATCH_DIRECT);
  }
  EXPORT_SYMBOL(ib_process_cq_direct);

@@ -88,7 +97,7 @@ static int ib_poll_handler(struct irq_poll *iop, int 
budget)
         struct ib_cq *cq = container_of(iop, struct ib_cq, iop);
         int completed;

-       completed = __ib_process_cq(cq, budget, NULL);
+       completed = __ib_process_cq(cq, budget, NULL, 0);
         if (completed < budget) {
                 irq_poll_complete(&cq->iop);
                 if (ib_req_notify_cq(cq, IB_POLL_FLAGS) > 0)
@@ -108,7 +117,7 @@ static void ib_cq_poll_work(struct work_struct *work)
         struct ib_cq *cq = container_of(work, struct ib_cq, work);
         int completed;

-       completed = __ib_process_cq(cq, IB_POLL_BUDGET_WORKQUEUE, NULL);
+       completed = __ib_process_cq(cq, IB_POLL_BUDGET_WORKQUEUE, NULL, 0);
         if (completed >= IB_POLL_BUDGET_WORKQUEUE ||
             ib_req_notify_cq(cq, IB_POLL_FLAGS) > 0)
                 queue_work(ib_comp_wq, &cq->work);



> 
> Jason
>