From: Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>
To: Dekel Peled <dekelp@mellanox.com>, Chao Zhu <chaozhu@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Yongseok Koh <yskoh@mellanox.com>,
Shahaf Shuler <shahafs@mellanox.com>,
"dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>, Ori Kam <orika@mellanox.com>,
"stable@dpdk.org" <stable@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] eal/ppc: remove fix of memory barrier for IBM POWER
Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2019 12:14:59 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1789153.zrlSK8XYcq@xps> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <VI1PR05MB42242D09494D874AC58CFC88B6400@VI1PR05MB4224.eurprd05.prod.outlook.com>
Guys, please let's avoid top-post.
You are both not replying to each other:
1/ Dekel mentioned the IBM doc but Chao did not argue about
the lack of IO protection with lwsync.
We assume that rte_mb should protect any access including IO.
2/ Chao asked about the semantic of the barrier used in mlx5 code,
but Dekel did not reply about the semantic: are we protecting
IO or general memory access?
19/03/2019 11:05, Dekel Peled:
> Hi,
>
> For ppc, rte_io_mb() is defined as rte_mb(), which is defined as asm sync.
> According to comments in arch/ppc_64/rte_atomic.h, rte_wmb() and rte_rmb() are the same as rte_mb(), for store and load respectively.
> My patch propose to define rte_wmb() and rte_rmb() as asm sync, like rte_mb(), since using lwsync is incorrect for them.
>
> Regards,
> Dekel
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Chao Zhu <chaozhu@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 5:24 AM
> > To: Dekel Peled <dekelp@mellanox.com>
> > Cc: Yongseok Koh <yskoh@mellanox.com>; Shahaf Shuler
> > <shahafs@mellanox.com>; dev@dpdk.org; Ori Kam <orika@mellanox.com>;
> > Thomas Monjalon <thomas@monjalon.net>; stable@dpdk.org
> > Subject: RE: [PATCH] eal/ppc: remove fix of memory barrier for IBM POWER
> >
> > Dekel£¬
> >
> > To control the memory order for device memory, I think you should use
> > rte_io_mb() instead of rte_mb(). This will generate correct result. rte_wmb()
> > is used for system memory.
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Dekel Peled <dekelp@mellanox.com>
> > > Sent: Monday, March 18, 2019 8:58 PM
> > > To: chaozhu@linux.vnet.ibm.com
> > > Cc: yskoh@mellanox.com; shahafs@mellanox.com; dev@dpdk.org;
> > > orika@mellanox.com; thomas@monjalon.net; dekelp@mellanox.com;
> > > stable@dpdk.org
> > > Subject: [PATCH] eal/ppc: remove fix of memory barrier for IBM POWER
> > >
> > > From previous patch description: "to improve performance on PPC64, use
> > > light weight sync instruction instead of sync instruction."
> > >
> > > Excerpt from IBM doc [1], section "Memory barrier instructions":
> > > "The second form of the sync instruction is light-weight sync, or lwsync.
> > > This form is used to control ordering for storage accesses to system
> > > memory only. It does not create a memory barrier for accesses to device
> > memory."
> > >
> > > This patch removes the use of lwsync, so calls to rte_wmb() and
> > > rte_rmb() will provide correct memory barrier to ensure order of
> > > accesses to system memory and device memory.
> > >
> > > [1]
> > >
> > https://eur03.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww
> > .
> > >
> > ibm.com%2Fdeveloperworks%2Fsystems%2Farticles%2Fpowerpc.html&
> > ;data=
> > >
> > 02%7C01%7Cdekelp%40mellanox.com%7C381426b6b9d042f776fa08d6ac1a5d
> > c5%7Ca
> > >
> > 652971c7d2e4d9ba6a4d149256f461b%7C0%7C0%7C636885626593364016&am
> > p;sdata
> > >
> > =wFYTcFX2A%2BMdtQMgtojTAtUOzqds7U5pypNS%2F2SoXUM%3D&re
> > served=0
> > >
> > > Fixes: d23a6bd04d72 ("eal/ppc: fix memory barrier for IBM POWER")
> > > Cc: stable@dpdk.org
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Dekel Peled <dekelp@mellanox.com>
> > > ---
> > > lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/ppc_64/rte_atomic.h | 8 --------
> > > 1 file changed, 8 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/ppc_64/rte_atomic.h
> > > b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/ppc_64/rte_atomic.h
> > > index ce38350..797381c 100644
> > > --- a/lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/ppc_64/rte_atomic.h
> > > +++ b/lib/librte_eal/common/include/arch/ppc_64/rte_atomic.h
> > > @@ -63,11 +63,7 @@
> > > * Guarantees that the STORE operations generated before the barrier
> > > * occur before the STORE operations generated after.
> > > */
> > > -#ifdef RTE_ARCH_64
> > > -#define rte_wmb() asm volatile("lwsync" : : : "memory")
> > > -#else
> > > #define rte_wmb() asm volatile("sync" : : : "memory")
> > > -#endif
> > >
> > > /**
> > > * Read memory barrier.
> > > @@ -75,11 +71,7 @@
> > > * Guarantees that the LOAD operations generated before the barrier
> > > * occur before the LOAD operations generated after.
> > > */
> > > -#ifdef RTE_ARCH_64
> > > -#define rte_rmb() asm volatile("lwsync" : : : "memory")
> > > -#else
> > > #define rte_rmb() asm volatile("sync" : : : "memory")
> > > -#endif
> > >
> > > #define rte_smp_mb() rte_mb()
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-03-19 11:15 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-03-18 12:58 Dekel Peled
2019-03-18 12:58 ` Dekel Peled
2019-03-19 3:24 ` Chao Zhu
2019-03-19 3:24 ` Chao Zhu
2019-03-19 10:05 ` Dekel Peled
2019-03-19 10:05 ` Dekel Peled
2019-03-19 11:14 ` Thomas Monjalon [this message]
2019-03-19 11:14 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-19 19:42 ` Shahaf Shuler
2019-03-19 19:42 ` Shahaf Shuler
2019-03-19 20:45 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-19 20:45 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-20 22:40 ` Pradeep Satyanarayana
2019-03-20 22:40 ` Pradeep Satyanarayana
2019-03-21 8:49 ` Shahaf Shuler
2019-03-21 8:49 ` Shahaf Shuler
2019-03-22 1:40 ` Pradeep Satyanarayana
2019-03-22 1:40 ` Pradeep Satyanarayana
2019-03-22 8:49 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-22 8:49 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-22 15:30 ` Pradeep Satyanarayana
2019-03-22 15:30 ` Pradeep Satyanarayana
2019-03-22 17:51 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-22 17:51 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-22 22:57 ` Pradeep Satyanarayana
2019-03-22 22:57 ` Pradeep Satyanarayana
2019-03-24 6:37 ` Shahaf Shuler
2019-03-24 6:37 ` Shahaf Shuler
2019-03-24 17:37 ` Pradeep Satyanarayana
2019-03-24 17:37 ` Pradeep Satyanarayana
2019-03-26 9:15 ` Dekel Peled
2019-03-26 9:15 ` Dekel Peled
2019-03-27 9:19 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-27 9:19 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-27 23:50 ` Pradeep Satyanarayana
2019-03-27 23:50 ` Pradeep Satyanarayana
[not found] ` <OF456B0ECC.006EF7E7-ON882583CA.00827A75-882583CA.0082F7BE@LocalDomain>
2019-03-28 17:51 ` Pradeep Satyanarayana
2019-03-28 17:51 ` Pradeep Satyanarayana
2019-03-28 17:56 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-28 17:56 ` Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-28 22:50 ` [dpdk-dev] [dpdk-stable] " Thomas Monjalon
2019-03-28 22:50 ` Thomas Monjalon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1789153.zrlSK8XYcq@xps \
--to=thomas@monjalon.net \
--cc=chaozhu@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=dekelp@mellanox.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=orika@mellanox.com \
--cc=shahafs@mellanox.com \
--cc=stable@dpdk.org \
--cc=yskoh@mellanox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).