[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180412173131.49f01252@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Apr 2018 17:31:31 +0200
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
Cc: "xdp-newbies@...r.kernel.org" <xdp-newbies@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>,
William Tu <u9012063@...il.com>,
Björn Töpel
<bjorn.topel@...el.com>,
"Karlsson, Magnus" <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
brouer@...hat.com
Subject: Re: XDP performance regression due to CONFIG_RETPOLINE Spectre V2
On Thu, 12 Apr 2018 16:56:53 +0200 Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 04:51:23PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 03:50:29PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> > > ---------------
> > > Implement support for keeping the DMA mapping through the XDP return
> > > call, to remove RX map/unmap calls. Implement bulking for XDP
> > > ndo_xdp_xmit and XDP return frame API. Bulking allows to perform DMA
> > > bulking via scatter-gatter DMA calls, XDP TX need it for DMA
> > > map+unmap. The driver RX DMA-sync (to CPU) per packet calls are harder
> > > to mitigate (via bulk technique). Ask DMA maintainer for a common
> > > case direct call for swiotlb DMA sync call ;-)
> >
> > Why do you even end up in swiotlb code? Once you bounce buffer your
> > performance is toast anyway..
>
> I guess that is because x86 selects it as the default as soon as
> we have more than 4G memory.
I were also confused why I ended up using SWIOTLB (SoftWare IO-TLB),
that might explain it. And I'm not hitting the bounce-buffer case.
How do I control which DMA engine I use? (So, I can play a little)
> That should be solveable fairly easily with the per-device dma ops,
> though.
I didn't understand this part.
I wanted to ask your opinion, on a hackish idea I have...
Which is howto detect, if I can reuse the RX-DMA map address, for TX-DMA
operation on another device (still/only calling sync_single_for_device).
With XDP_REDIRECT we are redirecting between net_device's. Usually
we keep the RX-DMA mapping as we recycle the page. On the redirect to
TX-device (via ndo_xdp_xmit) we do a new DMA map+unmap for TX. The
question is how to avoid this mapping(?). In some cases, with some DMA
engines (or lack of) I guess the DMA address is actually the same as
the RX-DMA mapping dma_addr_t already known, right? For those cases,
would it be possible to just (re)use that address for TX?
--
Best regards,
Jesper Dangaard Brouer
MSc.CS, Principal Kernel Engineer at Red Hat
LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/brouer
Powered by blists - more mailing lists