[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAHS8izNmT_NzgCu1pY1RKgJh+kP2rCL_90Gqau2Pkd3-48Q1_w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 08:43:58 -0700
From: Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>
To: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org,
linux-mips@...r.kernel.org, linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org,
sparclinux@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-arch@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org, linux-media@...r.kernel.org,
dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Donald Hunter <donald.hunter@...il.com>, Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>,
Richard Henderson <richard.henderson@...aro.org>, Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>, Thomas Bogendoerfer <tsbogend@...ha.franken.de>,
"James E.J. Bottomley" <James.Bottomley@...senpartnership.com>, Helge Deller <deller@....de>,
Andreas Larsson <andreas@...sler.com>, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>, Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@...nel.org>, Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com>, Song Liu <song@...nel.org>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>, John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>, Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>, David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>, Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>,
David Wei <dw@...idwei.uk>, Jason Gunthorpe <jgg@...pe.ca>, Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@...wei.com>,
Shailend Chand <shailend@...gle.com>, Harshitha Ramamurthy <hramamurthy@...gle.com>,
Shakeel Butt <shakeel.butt@...ux.dev>, Jeroen de Borst <jeroendb@...gle.com>,
Praveen Kaligineedi <pkaligineedi@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v10 02/14] net: page_pool: create hooks for
custom page providers
On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 7:52 AM Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On 6/3/24 15:17, Mina Almasry wrote:
> > On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 10:35 PM Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 08:16:01PM +0000, Mina Almasry wrote:
> >>> I'm unsure if the discussion has been resolved yet. Sending the series
> >>> anyway to get reviews/feedback on the (unrelated) rest of the series.
> >>
> >> As far as I'm concerned it is not. I've not seen any convincing
> >> argument for more than page/folio allocator including larger order /
> >> huge page and dmabuf.
> >>
> >
> > Thanks Christoph, this particular patch series adds dmabuf, so I
> > assume no objection there. I assume the objection is that you want the
> > generic, extensible hooks removed.
> >
> > To be honest, I don't think the hooks are an integral part of the
> > design, and at this point I think we've argued for them enough. I
> > think we can easily achieve the same thing with just raw if statements
> > in a couple of places. We can always add the hooks if and only if we
> > actually justify many memory providers.
> >
> > Any objections to me removing the hooks and directing to memory
> > allocations via simple if statements? Something like (very rough
> > draft, doesn't compile):
>
> The question for Christoph is what exactly is the objection here? Why we
> would not be using well defined ops when we know there will be more
> users? Repeating what I said in the last thread, for io_uring it's used
> to implement the flow of buffers from userspace to the kernel, the ABI,
> which is orthogonal to the issue of what memory type it is and how it
> came there. And even if you mandate unnecessary dmabuf condoms for user
> memory in one form or another IMHO for no clear reason, the callbacks
> (or yet another if-else) would still be needed.
>
> Sure, Mina can drop and hard code devmem path to easy the pain for
> him and delay the discussion, but then shortly after I will be
> re-sending same shit.
You don't need to re-send the same ops again, right? You can add io
uring support without ops. Something like:
diff --git a/net/core/page_pool.c b/net/core/page_pool.c
index 92be1aaf18ccc..2cc986455bce6 100644
--- a/net/core/page_pool.c
+++ b/net/core/page_pool.c
@@ -557,8 +557,8 @@ netmem_ref page_pool_alloc_netmem(struct page_pool
*pool, gfp_t gfp)
return netmem;
/* Slow-path: cache empty, do real allocation */
- if (static_branch_unlikely(&page_pool_mem_providers) && pool->mp_ops)
- netmem = pool->mp_ops->alloc_pages(pool, gfp);
+ if (unlikely(page_pool_is_dmabuf(pool)))
+ netmem = mp_dmabuf_devmem_alloc_pages():
+ else if (unlikely(page_pool_is_iouring(pool)))
+ netmem = mp_io_uring_alloc_pages():
else
netmem = __page_pool_alloc_pages_slow(pool, gfp);
return netmem;
So IMO, the ops themselves, which Christoph is repeatedly nacking, are
not that important.
I humbly think the energy should be spent convincing maintainers of
the use case of io uring memory, not the ops. The ops are a cosmetic
change to the code, and can be added later. Christoph is nacking the
ops because it gives people too much rope [1].
But if you disagree and think the ops themselves are important for a
reason I missed, I'm happy waiting until agreement is reached here.
Sorry, just voicing my 2 cents.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/ZjjHUh1eINPg1wkn@infradead.org/
--
Thanks,
Mina
Powered by blists - more mailing lists