[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240301065141-mutt-send-email-mst@kernel.org>
Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2024 06:53:05 -0500
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: wangyunjian <wangyunjian@...wei.com>
Cc: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
"willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com" <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>,
"jasowang@...hat.com" <jasowang@...hat.com>,
"kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
"bjorn@...nel.org" <bjorn@...nel.org>,
"magnus.karlsson@...el.com" <magnus.karlsson@...el.com>,
"maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com" <maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com>,
"jonathan.lemon@...il.com" <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"bpf@...r.kernel.org" <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"kvm@...r.kernel.org" <kvm@...r.kernel.org>,
"virtualization@...ts.linux.dev" <virtualization@...ts.linux.dev>,
xudingke <xudingke@...wei.com>, "liwei (DT)" <liwei395@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 3/3] tun: AF_XDP Tx zero-copy support
On Fri, Mar 01, 2024 at 11:45:52AM +0000, wangyunjian wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Paolo Abeni [mailto:pabeni@...hat.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, February 29, 2024 7:13 PM
> > To: wangyunjian <wangyunjian@...wei.com>; mst@...hat.com;
> > willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com; jasowang@...hat.com; kuba@...nel.org;
> > bjorn@...nel.org; magnus.karlsson@...el.com; maciej.fijalkowski@...el.com;
> > jonathan.lemon@...il.com; davem@...emloft.net
> > Cc: bpf@...r.kernel.org; netdev@...r.kernel.org;
> > linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; kvm@...r.kernel.org;
> > virtualization@...ts.linux.dev; xudingke <xudingke@...wei.com>; liwei (DT)
> > <liwei395@...wei.com>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 3/3] tun: AF_XDP Tx zero-copy support
> >
> > On Wed, 2024-02-28 at 19:05 +0800, Yunjian Wang wrote:
> > > @@ -2661,6 +2776,54 @@ static int tun_ptr_peek_len(void *ptr)
> > > }
> > > }
> > >
> > > +static void tun_peek_xsk(struct tun_file *tfile) {
> > > + struct xsk_buff_pool *pool;
> > > + u32 i, batch, budget;
> > > + void *frame;
> > > +
> > > + if (!ptr_ring_empty(&tfile->tx_ring))
> > > + return;
> > > +
> > > + spin_lock(&tfile->pool_lock);
> > > + pool = tfile->xsk_pool;
> > > + if (!pool) {
> > > + spin_unlock(&tfile->pool_lock);
> > > + return;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + if (tfile->nb_descs) {
> > > + xsk_tx_completed(pool, tfile->nb_descs);
> > > + if (xsk_uses_need_wakeup(pool))
> > > + xsk_set_tx_need_wakeup(pool);
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + spin_lock(&tfile->tx_ring.producer_lock);
> > > + budget = min_t(u32, tfile->tx_ring.size, TUN_XDP_BATCH);
> > > +
> > > + batch = xsk_tx_peek_release_desc_batch(pool, budget);
> > > + if (!batch) {
> >
> > This branch looks like an unneeded "optimization". The generic loop below
> > should have the same effect with no measurable perf delta - and smaller code.
> > Just remove this.
> >
> > > + tfile->nb_descs = 0;
> > > + spin_unlock(&tfile->tx_ring.producer_lock);
> > > + spin_unlock(&tfile->pool_lock);
> > > + return;
> > > + }
> > > +
> > > + tfile->nb_descs = batch;
> > > + for (i = 0; i < batch; i++) {
> > > + /* Encode the XDP DESC flag into lowest bit for consumer to differ
> > > + * XDP desc from XDP buffer and sk_buff.
> > > + */
> > > + frame = tun_xdp_desc_to_ptr(&pool->tx_descs[i]);
> > > + /* The budget must be less than or equal to tx_ring.size,
> > > + * so enqueuing will not fail.
> > > + */
> > > + __ptr_ring_produce(&tfile->tx_ring, frame);
> > > + }
> > > + spin_unlock(&tfile->tx_ring.producer_lock);
> > > + spin_unlock(&tfile->pool_lock);
> >
> > More related to the general design: it looks wrong. What if
> > get_rx_bufs() will fail (ENOBUF) after successful peeking? With no more
> > incoming packets, later peek will return 0 and it looks like that the
> > half-processed packets will stay in the ring forever???
> >
> > I think the 'ring produce' part should be moved into tun_do_read().
>
> Currently, the vhost-net obtains a batch descriptors/sk_buffs from the
> ptr_ring and enqueue the batch descriptors/sk_buffs to the virtqueue'queue,
> and then consumes the descriptors/sk_buffs from the virtqueue'queue in
> sequence. As a result, TUN does not know whether the batch descriptors have
> been used up, and thus does not know when to return the batch descriptors.
>
> So, I think it's reasonable that when vhost-net checks ptr_ring is empty,
> it calls peek_len to get new xsk's descs and return the descriptors.
>
> Thanks
What you need to think about is that if you peek, another call
in parallel can get the same value at the same time.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Paolo
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists