netdev - RE: [PATCH] xps-mq: Transmit Packet Steering for multiqueue

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: <D3F292ADF945FB49B35E96C94C2061B90D0670C9@nsmail.netscout.com>
Date:	Thu, 2 Sep 2010 11:55:27 -0400
From:	"Loke, Chetan" <Chetan.Loke@...scout.com>
To:	"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, <therbert@...gle.com>
Cc:	<eric.dumazet@...il.com>, <shemminger@...tta.com>,
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <Lee.Schermerhorn@...com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH] xps-mq: Transmit Packet Steering for multiqueue

> From: netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org [mailto:netdev-
> owner@...r.kernel.org] On Behalf Of David Miller
> It's becomming increasingly obvious to me that we need (somewhere,
> not necessarily the kernel) a complete datastructure representing
> the NUMA, cache, cpu, device hierarchy.
> 
> And that can be used to tweak all of this stuff.
> 
> The policy should probably be in userspace, we just need to provide
> the knobs in the kernel to tweak it however userspace wants.
> 

I agree. But only if we have all the knobs in the kernel.

http://www.spinics.net/lists/linux-numa/msg00709.html

I had to do some changes manually. Thanks to Lee for pointing out the
dma-call.


> Userspace should be able to, for example, move a TX queue into a
> NUMA domain and have this invoke several side effects:
> 
> 1) IRQs for that TX queue get rerouted to a cpu in the NUMA
>    domain.
> 
> 2) TX queue datastructures in the driver get reallocated using
>    memory in that NUMA domain.
> 
> 3) TX hashing is configured to use the set of cpus in the NUMA
>    domain.
> 
> It's alot of tedious work and involves some delicate tasks figuring
> out where each of these things go, but really then we'd solve all
> of this crap one and for all.
> --

The MSI-X+MQ combo is something that should be taken care off. We could
come up with an automatic-node-binding shim in the kernel and then all
the sub-systems can use that.

Basically, the userland should query 
i) the adapter-capabilities 
ii)get the node-binding info
iii)and then start affinitizing everything


Some older msi-x (non-ethernet)adapters assume the msi-x info to remain
static once the adapter is initialized. If we had an auto-node-binding
shim then that would mean re-initializing the adapter,correct?



Chetan Loke
--
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