[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1257477847.14523.30.camel@localhost>
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:24:07 -0800
From: Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC] move dma_head/dma_maps out of skb_shared_info and into
sk_buff
On Fri, 2009-11-06 at 03:14 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> Alexander Duyck a écrit :
> > During testing we found issues with the use of skb_dma_map/unmap on
> > systems that had iommu enabled and were configured to use a bridge. The
> > issue is that if two ports are members of the same bridge, and a
> > broadcast packet is sent out on the bridge skb_clone will be used to
> > send a copy to all ports, but the clones run into issues because the
> > dma mappings for the cloned skbs all share the shared_info structure
> > where the dma mappings are stored.
> >
> > To resolve that this patch moves those dma mappings out of the
> > shared_info structure and into the sk_buff itself. This allows cloned
> > skbs to be mapped separately without causing dma unmapping errors.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>
>
> Hello Alexander
>
> You probably know such a change is a major one ;)
> 1) a diffstat -p1 -w70 for this kind of patch would be nice.
>
> 2) Your patch is garbled (tabulations were replaced by spaces
> by your mailer)
I kind of figured that might be the case. I didn't really intend the
patch to be applied to the tree and just meant it to get conversation
going. That is why I had tagged it as [RFC].
> 3) Are you sure we need to clear dma_maps[] array and dma_head
> in __alloc_skb() ? I guess not.
> MAX_SKB_FRAGS = 18 on x86 -> 152 bytes on x86_64.
> Previous implementation was not clearing them.
> Thats would be a major slow down.
>
> 4) 152 bytes more in skb -> 304 bytes more in skbuff_fclone_cache
> Do we really want two copies of dma_maps[] when skb are allocated
> from fclone cache ?
The main problem that this was meant to address is the fact that
skb_dma_map is called dma_maps and dma_head needed to be maintained
until skb_dma_unmap was called. This wasn't happening with them being
stored in the skb_shared_info structure due to the fact that if two
clones of the skb were mapped on 2 different devices the 2nd mapping
would overwrite the first, and then the skb_dma_unmap call was being
called on the 2nd dma mapping twice which would trigger a dma_unmapping
error followed by an error of mappings still being held for the first
device on driver unload.
> 5) It seems to me this stuff is needed for xmit only and few drivers,
> could we find a way to not have it for RX path and drivers that dont
> need it ? Maybe drivers themselves should allocate storage for this
> stuff so we can remove it both from shared_info *and* skb
I'm thinking the best solution may be to drop the skb_dma_map/unmap
calls entirely and move things back to the old approach in which devices
maintained their list of mappings. At least until something better can
be figured out.
Thanks,
Alex
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists