[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAH=tA9F+hhKvbGaTb7j9km4niRR3K89MEgjz=aah9rB4A_tG4A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 20:50:30 +0300
From: Nicolae Rosia <nicolae.rosia@...il.com>
To: Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>
Cc: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
Jaeden Amero <jaeden.amero@...com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@...el.com>,
Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@...el.com>,
Josh Cartwright <joshc@...com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Bogdan Chifor <chiforbogdan86@...il.com>
Subject: Re: macb napi strange behavior
Hi,
I gave it a shot. Can you please take a look?
I don't know how to deal with multiple queues since Zynq 7000 has one
queue per interface.
I get a performance improvement of over 110 Mbps in IP forwarding (680
Mbps vs 570 Mbps) and a massive reduction of interrupts.
Patch below.
From: Nicolae Rosia <nicolae.rosia@...tsign.ro>
Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2015 19:44:50 +0300
Subject: [PATCH] macb: use tx napi
---
drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb.c | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---
1 file changed, 34 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb.c
b/drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb.c
index 30eedb1..2a3ecf7 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/cadence/macb.c
@@ -602,10 +602,13 @@ static void macb_tx_interrupt(struct macb_queue *queue)
{
unsigned int tail;
unsigned int head;
+#if 0
u32 status;
+#endif
struct macb *bp = queue->bp;
u16 queue_index = queue - bp->queues;
+#if 0
status = macb_readl(bp, TSR);
macb_writel(bp, TSR, status);
@@ -614,6 +617,7 @@ static void macb_tx_interrupt(struct macb_queue *queue)
netdev_vdbg(bp->dev, "macb_tx_interrupt status = 0x%03lx\n",
(unsigned long)status);
+#endif
head = queue->tx_head;
for (tail = queue->tx_tail; tail != head; tail++) {
@@ -951,12 +955,17 @@ static int macb_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget)
status = macb_readl(bp, RSR);
macb_writel(bp, RSR, status);
- work_done = 0;
+ status = macb_readl(bp, TSR);
+ if (status) {
+ macb_writel(bp, TSR, status);
+ macb_tx_interrupt(&bp->queues[0]);
+ }
netdev_vdbg(bp->dev, "poll: status = %08lx, budget = %d\n",
(unsigned long)status, budget);
work_done = bp->macbgem_ops.mog_rx(bp, budget);
+
if (work_done < budget) {
napi_complete(napi);
@@ -969,6 +978,16 @@ static int macb_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget)
} else {
macb_writel(bp, IER, MACB_RX_INT_FLAGS);
}
+
+ /* Packets received while interrupts were disabled */
+ status = macb_readl(bp, TSR);
+ if (status) {
+ if (bp->caps & MACB_CAPS_ISR_CLEAR_ON_WRITE)
+ macb_writel(bp, ISR, MACB_BIT(TCOMP));
+ napi_reschedule(napi);
+ } else {
+ macb_writel(bp, IER, MACB_TX_INT_FLAGS);
+ }
}
/* TODO: Handle errors */
@@ -1029,8 +1048,17 @@ static irqreturn_t macb_interrupt(int irq, void *dev_id)
break;
}
- if (status & MACB_BIT(TCOMP))
- macb_tx_interrupt(queue);
+ if (status & MACB_BIT(TCOMP)) {
+ /* disable tx interrupts */
+ queue_writel(queue, IDR, MACB_TX_INT_FLAGS);
+ if (bp->caps & MACB_CAPS_ISR_CLEAR_ON_WRITE)
+ queue_writel(queue, ISR, MACB_BIT(TCOMP));
+
+ if (napi_schedule_prep(&bp->napi)) {
+ netdev_vdbg(bp->dev, "scheduling TX softirq\n");
+ __napi_schedule(&bp->napi);
+ }
+ }
/*
* Link change detection isn't possible with RMII, so we'll
@@ -2348,6 +2376,7 @@ static int macb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
}
macb_probe_queues(mem, &queue_mask, &num_queues);
+ dev_err(&pdev->dev, "queue count: %d.\n", num_queues);
dev = alloc_etherdev_mq(sizeof(*bp), num_queues);
if (!dev)
goto err_out_disable_clocks;
@@ -2377,6 +2406,8 @@ static int macb_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
if (!(queue_mask & (1 << hw_q)))
continue;
+ dev_err(&pdev->dev, "queue index: %d\n", q);
+
queue = &bp->queues[q];
queue->bp = bp;
if (hw_q) {
--
2.1.0
On Sat, Jun 20, 2015 at 7:43 PM, Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com> wrote:
> Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com> :
> [...]
>> Typically, NAPI is used at the receive side of the Ethernet NIC/driver
>> to lower the hard/soft interrupt context switch, although there is
>> nothing that prevent you to implement a similar scheme for the
>> transmit side. Usually, for transmit you will be submitting one packet
>> for transmission and get a completion interrupt, so without interrupt
>> coalescing (software or hardware) you can end-up with 1 interrupt per
>> packet transmitted.
>
> The wording is a bit shy: there is a long standing policy to move
> everything to NAPI context (as well as go mostly lockless, etc.).
>
> Any taker to move macb Tx processing to NAPI context or should I consider it ?
>
> --
> Ueimor
--
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