Message-ID: <562C6B9B.3090804@gmail.com>
Date:	Sat, 24 Oct 2015 22:41:47 -0700
From:	Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>
To:	Helge Deller <deller@....de>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	linux-parisc@...r.kernel.org,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...senPartnership.com>,
	John David Anglin <dave.anglin@...l.net>,
	Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: CONFIG_XPS depends on L1_CACHE_BYTES being greater than
 sizeof(struct xps_map)

On 10/24/2015 07:43 AM, Helge Deller wrote:
> * Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>:
>> On 10/23/2015 03:17 PM, Helge Deller wrote:
>>> On 24.10.2015 00:00, Alexander Duyck wrote:
>>>> On 10/23/2015 02:08 PM, Helge Deller wrote:
>>>>> * Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>:
>>>>>> On Fri, 2015-10-23 at 21:25 +0200, Helge Deller wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then, how about simply changing it to twice of L1_CACHE_BYTES ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> #define XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC ((L1_CACHE_BYTES * 2 - sizeof(struct xps_map)) / sizeof(u16))
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Seems good to me.
>>>>>
>>>>> Great!
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you then maybe give me an Acked-by or signed-off for the patch below?
>>>>> It further adds a compile-time check to avoid that XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC
>>>>> gets calculated to zero on any architecture - otherwise no queues would
>>>>> be allocated.
>>>>>
>>>>> In addition I would like to push it for v4.3 then through my parisc-tree
>>>>> (after keeping it in for-next for 1-2 days), together with the patch
>>>>> which reduces L1_CACHE_BYTES to 16 on parisc.
>>>>> Would that be OK too?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks!
>>>>> Helge
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> [PATCH] net/xps: Increase initial number of xps queues
>>>>>
>>>>> Increase the number of initial allocated xps queues, so that the initial record
>>>>> allocates twice the size of L1_CACHE_BYTES bytes.
>>>>>
>>>>> This change is needed to copy with architectures where L1_CACHE_BYTES is
>>>>> defined to equal or less than 16 bytes.
>>>>>
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Helge Deller <deller@....de>
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h
>>>>> index 2d15e38..d152788 100644
>>>>> --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
>>>>> +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
>>>>> @@ -718,7 +718,7 @@ struct xps_map {
>>>>>        u16 queues[0];
>>>>>    };
>>>>>    #define XPS_MAP_SIZE(_num) (sizeof(struct xps_map) + ((_num) * sizeof(u16)))
>>>>> -#define XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC ((L1_CACHE_BYTES - sizeof(struct xps_map))    \
>>>>> +#define XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC ((L1_CACHE_BYTES * 2 - sizeof(struct xps_map)) \
>>>>>        / sizeof(u16))
>>>>>
>>>>>    /*
>>>>> diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
>>>>> index 6bb6470..f6d6dd1 100644
>>>>> --- a/net/core/dev.c
>>>>> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
>>>>> @@ -1972,6 +1972,8 @@ static struct xps_map *expand_xps_map(struct xps_map *map,
>>>>>        int alloc_len = XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC;
>>>>>        int i, pos;
>>>>>
>>>>> +    BUILD_BUG_ON(XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC == 0);
>>>>> +
>>>>>        for (pos = 0; map && pos < map->len; pos++) {
>>>>>            if (map->queues[pos] != index)
>>>>>                continue;
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Rather then leaving a potential bug you could probably rewrite the macro so that it will give you at least 1.
>>>>
>>>> All you need to do is something like the following
>>>> #define XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC \
>>>>      ((L1_CACHE_ALIGN(offsetof(struct xps_map, queue[1])) - \
>>>>        sizeof(struct xps_map)) / sizeof(u16))
>>>>
>>>> That should give you at least an XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC of 1.
>>>
>>> Yes, good idea!
>>>
>>> What makes me wonder though (because I have no idea about the XPS code/layer):
>>> How likely is it, that more than 1 (e.g. minimum "X") queues are needed?
>>> E.g. if a typical system needs at least 3 queues, then doesn't it make sense to allocate
>>> at least 3 initially by using queue[3] in your proposed patch above ?
>>> What would "X" be then?
>>
>> The question I would have is in how many cases it it likely that somebody
>> would enable this feature and point a given CPU at more than one queue.  I
>> know the Intel drivers that make use of XPS tend to do a 1:1 mapping for
>> their ATR feature.  I would think if anything most CPUs would probably be
>> mapped many:1, but you probably won't have all that many cases where it is
>> 1:many or many:many.
>>
>> I'd say starting with at least 1 should be fine.  Worst case scenario is we
>> have to make a couple more calls to expand_xps_map which will likely occur
>> as a slow path and infrequent event anyway.
>
> Ok, can I get then the signed-off or acked-by from you for this patch?
>
> Thanks,
> Helge
>
>
> [PATCH] net/xps: Fix calculation of initial number of xps queues
>
> The existing code breaks on architectures where the L1 cache size
> (L1_CACHE_BYTES) is smaller or equal the size of struct xps_map.
>
> The new code ensures that we get at minimum one initial xps queue, or
> even more as long as it fits into the next multiple of L1_CACHE_SIZE.
>
> Signed-off-by: Helge Deller <deller@....de>
>
> diff --git a/include/linux/netdevice.h b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> index 2d15e38..2212c82 100644
> --- a/include/linux/netdevice.h
> +++ b/include/linux/netdevice.h
> @@ -718,8 +718,8 @@ struct xps_map {
>   	u16 queues[0];
>   };
>   #define XPS_MAP_SIZE(_num) (sizeof(struct xps_map) + ((_num) * sizeof(u16)))
> -#define XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC ((L1_CACHE_BYTES - sizeof(struct xps_map))	\
> -    / sizeof(u16))
> +#define XPS_MIN_MAP_ALLOC ((L1_CACHE_ALIGN(offsetof(struct xps_map, queues[1])) \
> +       - sizeof(struct xps_map)) / sizeof(u16))
>
>   /*
>    * This structure holds all XPS maps for device.  Maps are indexed by CPU.
>

This looks good to me.

Acked-by: Alexander Duyck <aduyck@...antis.com>
--
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