netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next V2 06/11] net/mlx5e: SHAMPO: Separate pool for headers

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <aC-2ol2jMkHxV3RM@x130>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2025 16:43:30 -0700
From: Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org>
To: Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
	Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
	Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
	John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	bpf@...r.kernel.org, Moshe Shemesh <moshe@...dia.com>,
	Mark Bloch <mbloch@...dia.com>, Gal Pressman <gal@...dia.com>,
	Cosmin Ratiu <cratiu@...dia.com>,
	Dragos Tatulea <dtatulea@...dia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V2 06/11] net/mlx5e: SHAMPO: Separate pool for
 headers

On 22 May 16:24, Mina Almasry wrote:
>On Thu, May 22, 2025 at 4:09 PM Saeed Mahameed <saeed@...nel.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 22 May 15:30, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>> >On Fri, 23 May 2025 00:41:21 +0300 Tariq Toukan wrote:
>> >> Allocate a separate page pool for headers when SHAMPO is enabled.
>> >> This will be useful for adding support to zc page pool, which has to be
>> >> different from the headers page pool.
>> >
>> >Could you explain why always allocate a separate pool?
>>
>> Better flow management, 0 conditional code on data path to alloc/return
>> header buffers, since in mlx5 we already have separate paths to handle
>> header, we don't have/need bnxt_separate_head_pool() and
>> rxr->need_head_pool spread across the code..
>>
>> Since we alloc and return pages in bulks, it makes more sense to manage
>> headers and data in separate pools if we are going to do it anyway for
>> "undreadable_pools", and when there's no performance impact.
>>
>
>Are you allocating full pages for each incoming header (which is much
>smaller than a page)? Or are you reusing the same PAGE_SIZE from the
>page_pool to store multiple headers?
>

Multiple headers MLX5E_SHAMPO_WQ_HEADER_PER_PAGE;

>-- 
>Thanks,
>Mina