[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20190206230019.1303-1-xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2019 15:00:19 -0800
From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>,
Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>
Subject: [Patch net-next v2] mlx5: use RCU lock in mlx5_eq_cq_get()
mlx5_eq_cq_get() is called in IRQ handler, the spinlock inside
gets a lot of contentions when we test some heavy workload
with 60 RX queues and 80 CPU's, and it is clearly shown in the
flame graph.
In fact, radix_tree_lookup() is perfectly fine with RCU read lock,
we don't have to take a spinlock on this hot path. This is pretty
much similar to commit 291c566a2891
("net/mlx4_core: Fix racy CQ (Completion Queue) free"). Slow paths
are still serialized with the spinlock, and with synchronize_irq()
it should be safe to just move the fast path to RCU read lock.
This patch itself reduces the latency by about 50% for our memcached
workload on a 4.14 kernel we test. In upstream, as pointed out by Saeed,
this spinlock gets some rework in commit 02d92f790364
("net/mlx5: CQ Database per EQ"), so the difference could be smaller.
Cc: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
Cc: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>
Acked-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
Signed-off-by: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/eq.c | 12 ++++++------
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/eq.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/eq.c
index ee04aab65a9f..7092457705a2 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/eq.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/eq.c
@@ -114,11 +114,11 @@ static struct mlx5_core_cq *mlx5_eq_cq_get(struct mlx5_eq *eq, u32 cqn)
struct mlx5_cq_table *table = &eq->cq_table;
struct mlx5_core_cq *cq = NULL;
- spin_lock(&table->lock);
+ rcu_read_lock();
cq = radix_tree_lookup(&table->tree, cqn);
if (likely(cq))
mlx5_cq_hold(cq);
- spin_unlock(&table->lock);
+ rcu_read_unlock();
return cq;
}
@@ -371,9 +371,9 @@ int mlx5_eq_add_cq(struct mlx5_eq *eq, struct mlx5_core_cq *cq)
struct mlx5_cq_table *table = &eq->cq_table;
int err;
- spin_lock_irq(&table->lock);
+ spin_lock(&table->lock);
err = radix_tree_insert(&table->tree, cq->cqn, cq);
- spin_unlock_irq(&table->lock);
+ spin_unlock(&table->lock);
return err;
}
@@ -383,9 +383,9 @@ int mlx5_eq_del_cq(struct mlx5_eq *eq, struct mlx5_core_cq *cq)
struct mlx5_cq_table *table = &eq->cq_table;
struct mlx5_core_cq *tmp;
- spin_lock_irq(&table->lock);
+ spin_lock(&table->lock);
tmp = radix_tree_delete(&table->tree, cq->cqn);
- spin_unlock_irq(&table->lock);
+ spin_unlock(&table->lock);
if (!tmp) {
mlx5_core_warn(eq->dev, "cq 0x%x not found in eq 0x%x tree\n", eq->eqn, cq->cqn);
--
2.20.1
Powered by blists - more mailing lists