[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20190708082803.GA28592@apalos>
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 11:28:03 +0300
From: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>
To: Michael Chan <michael.chan@...adcom.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, gospo@...adcom.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
hawk@...nel.org, ast@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/4] bnxt_en: optimized XDP_REDIRECT support
Thanks Andy, Michael
> + if (event & BNXT_REDIRECT_EVENT)
> + xdp_do_flush_map();
> +
> if (event & BNXT_TX_EVENT) {
> struct bnxt_tx_ring_info *txr = bnapi->tx_ring;
> u16 prod = txr->tx_prod;
> @@ -2254,9 +2257,23 @@ static void bnxt_free_tx_skbs(struct bnxt *bp)
>
> for (j = 0; j < max_idx;) {
> struct bnxt_sw_tx_bd *tx_buf = &txr->tx_buf_ring[j];
> - struct sk_buff *skb = tx_buf->skb;
> + struct sk_buff *skb;
> int k, last;
>
> + if (i < bp->tx_nr_rings_xdp &&
> + tx_buf->action == XDP_REDIRECT) {
> + dma_unmap_single(&pdev->dev,
> + dma_unmap_addr(tx_buf, mapping),
> + dma_unmap_len(tx_buf, len),
> + PCI_DMA_TODEVICE);
> + xdp_return_frame(tx_buf->xdpf);
> + tx_buf->action = 0;
> + tx_buf->xdpf = NULL;
> + j++;
> + continue;
> + }
> +
Can't see the whole file here and maybe i am missing something, but since you
optimize for that and start using page_pool, XDP_TX will be a re-synced (and
not remapped) buffer that can be returned to the pool and resynced for
device usage.
Is that happening later on the tx clean function?
> + skb = tx_buf->skb;
> if (!skb) {
> j++;
> continue;
> @@ -2517,6 +2534,13 @@ static int bnxt_alloc_rx_rings(struct bnxt *bp)
> if (rc < 0)
> return rc;
>
> + rc = xdp_rxq_info_reg_mem_model(&rxr->xdp_rxq,
> + MEM_TYPE_PAGE_SHARED, NULL);
> + if (rc) {
> + xdp_rxq_info_unreg(&rxr->xdp_rxq);
I think you can use page_pool_free directly here (and pge_pool_destroy once
Ivan's patchset gets nerged), that's what mlx5 does iirc. Can we keep that
common please?
If Ivan's patch get merged please note you'll have to explicitly
page_pool_destroy, after calling xdp_rxq_info_unreg() in the general unregister
case (not the error habdling here). Sorry for the confusion this might bring!
> + return rc;
> + }
> +
> rc = bnxt_alloc_ring(bp, &ring->ring_mem);
> if (rc)
> return rc;
> @@ -10233,6 +10257,7 @@ static const struct net_device_ops bnxt_netdev_ops = {
[...]
Thanks!
/Ilias
Powered by blists - more mailing lists