[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <7dd230fb-ca58-4407-98df-03ddb2ac68a9@intel.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2025 08:45:21 -0700
From: Ahmed Zaki <ahmed.zaki@...el.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>, <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
<edumazet@...gle.com>, <kuba@...nel.org>, <horms@...nel.org>,
<davem@...emloft.net>, <michael.chan@...adcom.com>, <tariqt@...dia.com>,
<anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, <przemyslaw.kitszel@...el.com>,
<jdamato@...tly.com>, <shayd@...dia.com>, <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
<shayagr@...zon.com>, <kalesh-anakkur.purayil@...adcom.com>,
<pavan.chebbi@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v8 3/6] net: napi: add CPU affinity to
napi_config
On 2025-02-13 5:26 a.m., Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On 2/11/25 10:06 PM, Ahmed Zaki wrote:
>> @@ -394,10 +395,8 @@ struct napi_struct {
>> struct list_head dev_list;
>> struct hlist_node napi_hash_node;
>> int irq;
>> -#ifdef CONFIG_RFS_ACCEL
>> struct irq_affinity_notify notify;
>> int napi_rmap_idx;
>> -#endif
>
> I'm sorry for the late doubt, but it's not clear to me why you need to
> add the #ifdef in the previous patch ?!?
It was there to make the code consistent, since the rmap and the
notifier were only needed for ARFS.
It can be removed, although I am not sure if there would be any warnings
since on !CONFIG_ARFS_ACCEL the fields would never be used.
>
>> diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
>> index 209296cef3cd..d2c942bbd5e6 100644
>> --- a/net/core/dev.c
>> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
>> @@ -6871,28 +6871,39 @@ void netif_queue_set_napi(struct net_device *dev, unsigned int queue_index,
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(netif_queue_set_napi);
>>
>> -#ifdef CONFIG_RFS_ACCEL
>> static void
>> -netif_irq_cpu_rmap_notify(struct irq_affinity_notify *notify,
>> - const cpumask_t *mask)
>> +netif_napi_irq_notify(struct irq_affinity_notify *notify,
>> + const cpumask_t *mask)
>> {
>> struct napi_struct *napi =
>> container_of(notify, struct napi_struct, notify);
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_RFS_ACCEL
>> struct cpu_rmap *rmap = napi->dev->rx_cpu_rmap;
>> int err;
>> +#endif
>>
>> - err = cpu_rmap_update(rmap, napi->napi_rmap_idx, mask);
>> - if (err)
>> - netdev_warn(napi->dev, "RMAP update failed (%d)\n",
>> - err);
>> + if (napi->config && napi->dev->irq_affinity_auto)
>> + cpumask_copy(&napi->config->affinity_mask, mask);
>> +
>> +#ifdef CONFIG_RFS_ACCEL
>> + if (napi->dev->rx_cpu_rmap_auto) {
>> + err = cpu_rmap_update(rmap, napi->napi_rmap_idx, mask);
>> + if (err)
>> + netdev_warn(napi->dev, "RMAP update failed (%d)\n",
>> + err);
>> + }
>> +#endif
>
> Minor nit: if you provide a netif_rx_cpu_rmap() helper returning
> dev->rx_cpu_rmap or NULL for !CONFIG_RFS_ACCEL build, you can avoid the
> above 2 ifdefs and possibly more below.
>
Thanks, I will add this if there is a new version.
>> @@ -6915,7 +6926,6 @@ static int napi_irq_cpu_rmap_add(struct napi_struct *napi, int irq)
>> if (rc)
>> goto err_set;
>>
>> - set_bit(NAPI_STATE_HAS_NOTIFIER, &napi->state);
>
> Minor nit: I think it would be better if the previous patch would add
> directly this line in netif_napi_set_irq_locked() (avoding the removal
> here).
>
yes, it just made more sense for that patch.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists