linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH rdma-next] RDMA/rdmavt: Decouple QP and SGE lists allocations

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: <CH0PR01MB71533DE9DBEEAEC7C250F8F8F2509@CH0PR01MB7153.prod.exchangelabs.com>
Date:   Fri, 14 May 2021 15:00:37 +0000
From:   "Marciniszyn, Mike" <mike.marciniszyn@...nelisnetworks.com>
To:     Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...dia.com>,
        "Dalessandro, Dennis" <dennis.dalessandro@...nelisnetworks.com>
CC:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
        Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH rdma-next] RDMA/rdmavt: Decouple QP and SGE lists
 allocations

> The core stuff in ib_qp is not performance sensitive and has no obvious node
> affinity since it relates primarily to simple control stuff.
> 

The current rvt_qp "inherits" from ib_qp, so the fields in the "control" stuff are performance critical especially for receive processing and have historically live in the same allocation.

I would in no way call these fields "simple control stuff".    The rvt_qp structure is tuned to optimize receive processing and the NUMA locality is part of that tuning.

We could separate out the allocation, but that misses promoting fields from rvt_qp that may indeed be common into the core.

I know that we use the qpn from ib_qp and there may be other fields in the critical path.

Mike